Pentagon talking points on Iraq, war on terror

[Veronica.Franco]

An incredibly lengthy "prep book" for discussion of the Iraq war and US efforts to end terrorism has been issued to supporters in Congress, and acquired by RAW STORY.

The 74 page document seems to be an election year guide for Republicans and Democratic supporters of the war, with many of the "points" seeming to be rebuttals to arguments made by opponents of the war.

Other portions seek to categorize opponents of the war as "cut and run" advocates.

Though certain images could not, as of the time of publication, be transferred, we are making available to readers the entire Pentagon playbook for debate, which follows:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Republican_talking_points_on_Iraq_war_0615.html

[eFriendly]

1. Perhaps we need a talking point of our own. . .

* has defined "success in Iraq" as: a government that can sustain itself, defend itself, govern itself, and an ally on the war on terror.

Well, before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, Iraq already had a government that sustained itself, defended itself, and governed itself. The only thing Iraq wasn't was an ally in *'s war on terror.

Three years of war in Iraq, 2,500 U.S. troops killed, tens of thousands more servicemen and women maimed, hundreds of billions of dollars spent on the war – and all we get for it all is ONLY one more ally in the war on terror?! And even that is only a MAYBE.

There's one of them 'Priceless' commercials in the making with this, I'm sure of it. :)

On edit: took out the "B-word" *grin*

[Moderator]

2. Duplicate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2339776