The Bush Administration reported this week that despite six years of waging war against al-Qaeda, losing more than 3,600 American lives, spending nearly half a trillion dollars, and decimating the nation of Iraq (the so-called “front line in the war on terrorism”), it has neverless failed to seriously cripple the terrorist network.  In the face of this damning report, President Bush inexplicably refuses to make any changes in strategy, refuses to reconsider his foreign policy and refuses to acknowledge that his claim of “winning the war on terrorism” conspicuously lacks supporting proof.  All of this makes me to wonder:  if this is “winning,” then what is “losing”?

Before anyone answers that “losing” would be a biological weapon exploding in Times Square or a nuclear blast on the Washington Mall, please provide evidence that Bush’s “war on terrorism” has actually reduced al-Qaeda’s access to such weapons in any significant way.  Where is the evidence that Bush’s decision to keep American troops bogged down in Iraq is having any significant impact against al-Qaeda’s nerve center in Pakistan, or its terrorist “cells” allegedly scattered throughout the world?

This entry was posted on Friday, July 13th, 2007 at 3:48 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.