I'll never understand this

Several of us have posted before about the relative insanity of some of the groups opposed to US policy in Iraq. Clearly, reasonable people can differ on this issue, and I would never be heard to say that all those who oppose the administration's policies is insane. But some are, like these guys, and these guys. And perhaps the clearest example I have yet seen is this remarkable brochure from the International ANSWER web site, entitled "Counter-revolution and Resistance in Iraq." It's a "history" of modern-day Iraq, seen through the prism of American and British colonialism. The concluding paragraphs must be quoted to be believed:

The counter-revolution in the Soviet Union paved the way for U.S. aggression and counter-revolution in Iraq, the negation of Iraq's sovereignty and the destruction of the structures that made it an independent state.

Having achieved their victory, however, the occupiers now confront a people who have a long and proud history of resistance. The anti-war movement here and around the world must give its unconditional support to the Iraqi anti-colonial resistance.

Of course, The Washington Post keeps reporting that (see, e.g., here), that the "anti-colonial resisters" are mainly "supporters of former president Saddam Hussein, Islamic militants and foreign guerrillas," by which one can understand al Queda.

So, the peace movement urges us to support the Baaths, who have employed nerve gas against the Kurds and perpetrated other atrocities (the the mass graves did not fill themselves>, and al Queda, who are responsible for all sort of things, not least 9/11.

I knew they were nuts, but can they mean this? Can they really mean that a rational reaction for those who opposed US action in Iraq is to root for al Queda types to kill as many US soldiers as possible? I suppose they do, but I'll never understand why.
- posted by Anonymous @ 7:08 PM