In an interview with New York Times columnist David Brooks published today, Defense Secretary Robert Gates was hesitant to endorse several cornerstones of President Bush’s foreign policy: “I don’t think you invade Iraq to bring liberty. You do it to eliminate an unstable regime and because sanctions are breaking down and you get liberty as a byproduct,” he continued.
GOI: No, the byproducts are chaos, ethnic cleansing, millions of civilian deaths, civil war, a broken military, a depleted treasury and the wasted lives of our brave and noble American soldiers. Liberty my white, hairy ass. It's more like liberated them from their bodies by putting them in an environment where they find themselves on the wrong side of the barrel of a militia members gun.
I asked him [Gates] whether invading Iraq was a good idea, knowing what we know now. He looked at me for a bit and said, “I don’t know.”
GOI: First it was General Petraeus, the head of military operations in Iraq who "didn't know" if the Iraq war was making us safer here in the states and now It's the Secretary of Defense!! How does this administration expect people to think this war is worth it when their own Sec. Def. and head of military operations in Iraq have themselves doubts?And they accuse the Democrats as hurting troop morale? The Dem's and anti-war Independents want to save our troops and bring them home. Where as the leadership of the war within the administration (not including the goof ball brothers, Bush and Cheney) have no idea what to tell the troops. They have no clue what the war was about, is about or what it is accomplishing. Yeah, those seem like good reasons to stay there, because we don't know what else to do? Here's a thought, let's try LEAVING!!!
---End of Transmission---