Kuhl ready for more rubberstamping on Iraq
From the Fighting29th:
Reader Elmer sends today’s Corning Leader front page [pdf] and jump [pdf], where Randy Kuhl makes some statements that sound like he’s going to support continued US presence in Iraq.
His argument, as Rotten notes, is total garbage:
But has it diffused [sic] al-Qaida from attacking this country? The answer is yes. Has it defused Iraq from attacking us? The answer is yes.
Have they had to use resources they would otherwise be able to direct at killing people in this country for other purposes? The answer is yes. Have we kept bin Laden in a hole? The answer is yes.
Of course the answer is “no”, to all of this. There were no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we went in and there aren’t that many there now (we did a post on this earlier). Al Qaeda is based in Pakistan.
Al Qaeda has nothing to do with Iraq. It’s a red herring. All evidence suggests that the big terrorist attacks are orchestrated by former Baathists (read this article for more information).
Joe Dunning is right: Randy Kuhl will lose his job over his idiotic, blind support for The Decider’s Iraq policies.
Update: Rotten makes a good point in the comments:
Joe Dunning wrote that piece, and it it’s interesting that he led with the weakest part of the Petraeus testimony: his waffling about whether the war is making us safer. That’s the key, overaching issue, and Dunning hits it hard in a news story. More than his editorial this week, this story signals that Kuhl will get no breaks on Iraq from the local press, because they’re armed with hard questions and will ask them, repeatedly.
Related posts:
He’s starting to sound like Rumsfeld-asking inane questions and then answering them:
Joe Dunning wrote that piece, and it it’s interesting that he led with the weakest part of the Petraeus testimony: his waffling about whether the war is making us safer. That’s the key, overaching issue, and Dunning hits it hard in a news story. More than his editorial this week, this story signals that Kuhl will get no breaks on Iraq from the local press, because they’re armed with hard questions and will ask them, repeatedly.