"I think it’s obvious that the difficulties we’ve experienced in Iraq have certainly emboldened," terrorist groups, "but I would also argue that these people didn’t need any motivation to attack us on Sept. 11."How disingenuous of you, Senator. What do you suppose were the reasons that motivated the attacks on September 11th? How did the Iraq war aid in our prosecuting the individuals or organizations behind that attack? By mentioning September 11th and Iraq in the same sentence, aren't you furthering the conflagration of the two despite repeated proof that they had nothing to do with each other? Isn't the administration supposed to be making us safer from terrorism? Since Iraq was not involved with September 11th in the first place and had nothing to do with that attack, doesn't the finding that our war in that country causes more terrorist recruits to emerge become a damnation of that action and shouldn't it require us to rethink our policy? What is the exit strategy anyhow?
You've become a fucking water boy for a failed, dishonest, and incompetent administration and by doing so you've eroded that ample support you had amongst people in both parties who thought that you had a great deal of integrity. If you choose to run for the presidency, expect these sorts of comments to be played over and over again. You've made the mistake of believing that this administration will see us clear of this war and it will not. Things will continue to get worse and as they do, your party and yourself will continue to dig a deeper hole.
Speaking of a deeper hole, Senator, what do you think of this article in the same paper which details the problems that the military is having with both recruitment and equipment? Has the Iraq war, which has nothing to do with September 11th, depleted our resources and made us less prepared to defend ourselves and our allies in case of an attack? Can we respond properly to an affront to one of our many obligations in the world?