From Hugh Hewitt (in a piece on why Rudy is polling so well):
As the early battles on the Hill have shown, this cycle is all about the war, and thus the Republicans will be looking for the nominee best suited to win it, the Democrats for the nominee most committed to its abandonment.
One side clearly wants to win this war. The other side — who’s not even convinced we are at war — clearly doesn’t think victory is an option, yet can’t admit that the opposite of victory is defeat.
So, are we on the side of the Shia or the Sunnis?
I think the Sunnis, because that is who the Bush regime is arming illegally.
Rather than support one group directly, I say we employ most of our capital destroying one particular side.
And considering that al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni, I say we start with killing as many of them as possible while we’re in Iraq.
Screw it!
Instead of asking who’s side WE are on, I say, dip the bullets in pig blood (ala “Black Jack” Pershing), kill anybody who looks cross-eye’d at our troops, and all of a sudden you will find that “they” have lost the will to fight.
But hey, what do I know?
Casey- It looks like irony to me but it’s hard to tell which kind.
BTW- did we lose our will to fight when 3000 people were killed on American soil? According to your theory if al Qaeda had just killed more people we would have surrendered.