|
N'en déplaise à Obama et à tous ceux qui souhaitent une défaite des Américains en Irak, les affaires vont plutôt mal pour l'organisation de Ben Laden. Voici un extrait d'un document produit par Al-Qaeda et intercepté par l'armée américaine: « There were almost 600 fighters in our sector before the tribes changed course 360 degrees . . . Many of our fighters quit and some of them joined the deserters . . . As a result of that the number of fighters dropped down to 20 or less. We were mistreated, cheated and betrayed by some of our brothers who used to be part of the Jihadi movement. We lost cities and afterward, villages… We find ourselves in a wasteland desert. The Islamic State of Iraq [al-Qaeda] is faced with an extraordinary crisis, especially in al-Anbar province. Al-Qaeda’s expulsion from Anbar created weakness and psychological defeat. This also created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight. The morale of the fighters went down and they wanted to be transferred to administrative positions rather than be fighters. There was a total collapse in the security structure of the organisation. » |
Victoire 
Leave a Reply
J’ai du mal à comprendre ceux qui souhaitent une défaite américaine… c’est clair qu’un retrait américain engendrerait le chaos en Irak !
Ceux qui souhaitent une defaite americaine s’en foutent des irakiens, tout ce qu’ils veulent c’est de voir les Americains perdre.
Je n’ai pas entendu Obama dire qu’il voulait que les Américains perdent, ou bien est-ce que David exagérerait? Voyons, c’est impossible…
Retirer les troupes = aveu de defaite
C’est vrai qu’ils ont parlé de ça, cependant je ne crois vraiment pas qu’aucun futur président américain va retirer les troupes de sitôt, qu’il soit démocrate ou républicain.
Les Dems, en tout cas certains d’entre eux comme Obama, souhaitent la défaite car ils savent qu’une victoire des républicains en Irak leur coûterait cher sur le plan intérieur.
D’un certains point de vue, cela s’apparent à de la trahison.
Il veut retirer les troupe d’Irak.
La stratégie d’Obama en Irak c’est comme si un club de hockey qui mène une partie par 3 buts avec 5 minutes à jouer décidait de retirer son gardien.
Bien d’accord.
Cependant, je dirais davantage que les USA mènent par un but, et non trois. Al-Qaeda doit encore être éradiquée du nord du pays, l’Armée du Mahdi de Mouqtada doit être exterminée et dissoute, et il faut absolument éliminer l’action déstabilisante de l’Iran dans le sud du pays.
Mais sur le principe, bien d’accord: c’est pas quand les choses commencent à bien aller qu’il faut s’en aller.
Comme le disais Podhorez plus haut, ça a pris trois ans à Lincoln pour trouver Sherman et Grant, ça a pris trois ans à Bush pour trouver Petraeus.
À présent, laissons Petraeus et les boys finir la job.
Il y a quelques rumeurs selon laquelles McCain aurait tenté de savoir si la job de vice-président l’intéressait…
En d’autres circonstances, je serais le premier à applaudir. Mais je crois que Petraeus doit terminer le boulot en Irak.
Il aura pas le temps de buter des terroristes et à la fois faire exploser les Démocrates…
McCain serait mieux épaulé par un économiste conservateur de renom que par un autre militaire; en tout cas, cela donnerait davantage de profondeur à son cénacle. Un reaganien, peut-être? Cela serait plus rassembleur qu’un southern preacher embauché pour calmer l’aile évangéliste.
Fred Thompson !
Voici les options:
# Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: Would bring gender and racial balance, indicating a new GOP, but also closely linked to President Bush and Iraq problems.
# Florida Gov. Charlie Crist: Stepped in to endorse him a crucial moment; big, big state (where he has sky high approval ratings) to keep in Republican column. But he is divorced and single, which might cause social conservative angst.
# Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: Some see his continuing in the race as trying to leverage his way onto the ticket, but is he hurting his chances by firing up social conservatives against McCain; his choice would dismay fiscal conservatives and perhaps drive away some independents
# South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford: Young, a governor and a southerner, he’s called the rare GOP politician who can appeal to both fiscal and social conservatives; charasmatic, but his renegade tendencies have rubbed many in his party the wrong way.
# Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison: Again, a gender-balanced ticket, with a hugely popular politician from a huge state. Conservatives, however, gripe about her support of legalized abortions and embryonic stem cell research.
# Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue: Would help in the south as well as his populous state where he cruised to a second term in ’06, against a strong Democratic tide. He did well with African-American voters, but that’s worth a pint of warm spit against Barack Obama. He’s also been dragging around some controversy on some personal land deals.
# South Dakota Sen. John Thune: A national GOP hero when he knocked off Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle » in ’04; he’s only 47, which might offset voters’ concerns about electing a septuagenarian, but not many November votes are hiding in the Dakotas. Also, not exactly « Mr. Excitement. »
# Connecticutt Sen. Joe Lieberman: Yes, he’s still a Democrat, but he’s supported McCain’s Iraq stand and would represent something fresh: a unity ticket. But yeah, he’s still a Democrat.
# Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: Winning two terms in this Midwestern swing state provide a compelling argument for the 48-year-old, but would he assure any conservatives?
# Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush: Likeable politican from a crucial swing state; but carries a now-questionable brand.
# Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn: Like McCain, an energetic battler of congressional pork, this sometimes controversail doctor will energize the social conservatives, but would his famous safe-sex lectures erupt on the campaign trail?.
# North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr: Hand picked by Karl Rove to run for John Edwards’ seat, this descendant of Arron Burr (who was a vice president) has some buzz going for him in the party, but is unknown outside.
# Former Ohio Rep. Rob Portman: Has strong experience in budget and trade matters in the Bush administration; is only 52, and did we mention he’s from super swing state Ohio? He says he doesn’t want it, is looking at a run at governor or Senate.
# South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint: Fiscal conservatives like him as a strong believer in free-market solutions, but did endorsing Mitt Romney hurt him?
# Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal: A rising star in the Party, another young southern governor, but perhaps too new, to inexperiened for the big show.
# Indiana Rep. Mike Pence: Over seven years in Congress, Pence has « established himself as a principled, determined conservative » who is an « active defender » of political speech, and voted against the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance restrictions.
# Florida Sen. Mel Martinez: From a big important state, would help hugely with the Hispanic vote, but his work on immigration reforms would work against him with the anti-immigration wing of the party.
# Former Homeland Security Secretary and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge: Comes from a big swing state, stood up in the post-9/11 environment; is a close friend and adviser to McCain. But — he is a low-key supporter of abortion rights.
# Former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm: Well known for the spending reduction measure that bears his name; brings strong economic credentials, from big state. But he’s no spring chicken.
# Steve Forbes, Forbes Inc. CEO: An out-of-the-box pick, an outsider in a year people are calling for change; lots of business acumen, but how good of a campaigner, despite the experience of his past presidential bid.
# Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson: This idea would been a lot better before the actor displayed his – let’s just say « unique » – campaign style. Conservatives still like him, but let’s face it, he looks older than McCain.
# Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney: Strong with fiscal conservatives, he’s got too huge strikes against him. His Mormonism is now a proven none-starter in the South and McCain personally dislikes him.
Source: http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/elections/story/488348-p2.html
Vous avez un agresseur prêt à violer vos enfants dans une prison non loin de votre maison. Du jour au lendemain, on décide de détruire la prison de licencier les agents et de laisser aller tous les criminels dans la nature.
C,est exactement ce que propose les lâches qui veulent abonner l'Irak, le laisser devenir un bastion terroriste ou pire une deuxième république islamique.Ce sont ses mêmes lâches qui trouvaient dans le passé que la dictature de Saddam Hussein avait quelque chose de séduisant.
On pourrais également poser la question aux communistes du NPD ou a cette inergumaine de Stephane Dion, qui souhaite voir l'Afghanistan tomber entre les mains des talibans dans quelques années. Et ce sinitre personnage n'a pas encore compris que pour reconstruire quelque chose il vont tout d'abord stabiliser la région. J'imagine déja cette bande de jolie lurons débarquer a Kaboul pour donner de l'aide huminitaire sans l'ombre d'une protection. Et de croire naivement que ce sera l'eldorado.