This letter is associated with the following article:
Letters
Thursday, December 8, 2005 12:00 AM

Can't win in Iraq? Somebody told us that we already had

So Howard Dean is a "bloodthirsty traitor" for expressing "pessimism" about the war? Remember what the president once said?
Tim Grieve

Read other letters about this article

  • Thursday, December 8, 2005 08:08 AM

    winning the war on terror

    Careful, Tim. Bush told Matt Lauer that he didn't think the war on terror could be won. That's perfectly true, the same way the war on bank robbery can never be won. There will always be somebody with a new reason and a new idea for doing terror.

    But -- you're playing Bush's game. Bush's remark to Lauer is utterly irrelevant to the war in Iraq, because that war is not part of the war on terror! If anything, the war in Iraq serves to provoke terrorists, not fight them.

    —drlimerick Read drlimerick's other letters

    Flag
Read other letters about this article

Most Active Letters Threads

683

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
Glenn Greenwald Read article
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
Glenn Greenwald Read article
494

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
Glenn Greenwald Read article
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
Glenn Greenwald Read article
296

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame
Joan Walsh Read article

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon