I Wouldn't Call This Civil

The Democrats want to view the situation in Iraq, as a subsequent civil war. I wouldn't give what's happening that much credit myself. I would call it gang warfare, by a group of Muslim extremist. Let's first define what a civil war is: Main Entry: civil war
Function: noun
: a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country.
The war in Iraq is not being fueled, by the Iraqi people. Insurgents are being shipped in to fight, from other countries. The people are thankful for what the American troops are doing. That's something the media doesn't talk about. They were under a dictator before America invaded them. Saddam Hussein was lining them up and killing them indiscriminately. Without a doubt there is a religious war going on between the Sunnis and the Shite's. Then of course we have the Kurds. They're just looking for a place to call home. America is the voice of reason. In the midst of all these unstable forces. How do you classify a belief that promotes the slaughter of innocent women and children, as a religion?

As I have always stated, and I think the president says it best. "We don't negotiate with terrorist". All of the latest reports. And the recent proposals. The "Baker, Hamilton report" the "Iraqi Intelligence" study. Suggest exactly what we have said we wouldn't be doing. Starting something monumental and not completing the job.That's why we are there to begin with. To provide a Democratic way of life. Like we as American citizens enjoy. And attack terrorism at it's base. I'm not a military strategist by any stretch of the imagination. Even I know this. You don't give the enemy time to build a weapon to defeat you. If possible you nip it in the bud. Maybe that's the reason the American public doesn't have the stomach to do what they should. The first step in solving the problem, is acknowledging it's presence. I can think of many ways to describe this war. One description I wouldn't use though. I wouldn't call this civil.