Last Combat troops remain in iraq-another obama end run around the truth

[del]

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

psssst. it's 2010 not 1980. try again, von clauswitz

The principles are the same. Substitute China and Japan for Soviet Union and Germany. Is that too hard a concept for you?

then why didn't you say china and japan? is that too hard a concept for you, herr rommel?

 

[Luissa]

Sometimes, it's not about 'running their own military. Sometimes, it's about defending the interests of this nation. It is not always obvious but, with a bit of effort, you can learn all kinds of shit about why we do what we do.

Sorry, I just don't agree with us acting like an Empire.

protecting our own interests =/= acting like an empire.

I got an idea, let's start a thread about coloring so that you can participate to.

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

 

[GHook93]

Sorry, I just don't agree with us acting like an Empire.

protecting our own interests =/= acting like an empire.

I got an idea, let's start a thread about coloring so that you can participate to.

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

Do we control any aspect of any of the countries in which we have a military presence in? Do we exploit the resources of any of the countries we have a military presence in? Do we influence unnaturally any of the countries we have a military presence? Do we run the government, police or military of the countries we have a military presence in?

Are you trying to say that none of these countries where we have a military presence in are FULLY independent countries, Germany, Cuba, South Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Australia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Qatar, Bahrain, Honduras, Canada etc?

 

[ConHog]

I do love how any time I don't agree with you Conjob, you feel the need to put down my intelligence. It shows what kind of person you are.

I told you loose ass, as long as you make fun of my name you will get like in return.

And I told you, if you keep putting me down, I won't be nice to you.
I was trying to have a discussion with you, and trying to be an adult, of course you couldn't handle that.
I am sorry I don't agree with you on the military, but I have a right to my opinion, and it doesn't mean I am stupid. I have also spent a few years taking history in college, and most Empires were just like us. They felt the need to have a presence around the world, and they also felt the need to tell other countries how to run their military and country. Sound familiar?

You should also do a little research on the Opium Wars in China, maybe you will learn something.

I never argued that we haven't at times acted like an empire, I do argue that protecting our interests around the world does not qualify as such.

As for the other, give me a break, I cant even recall the last time you typed conhog without resorting to some childish pejorative version of it, so don't throw rocks, you may break one of your own glass walls.

 

[ConHog]

Sorry, I just don't agree with us acting like an Empire.

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

You say you're studying history in college? Good then you realize no doubt that history is cyclical. the 2010s are no different than the 80s, only the players have changed. In 2040 there will be another thread out there and it will resemble this threat only by different characters. It's the way of the world

As for world police, I agree with that, but at the same time every time something happens in the world , everyone looks at the US to solve the problem; then get's pissed at how we solve it. It's a lose/lose for us.

 

[California Girl]

Sorry, I just don't agree with us acting like an Empire.

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

You're not actually blaming us for WWI and II, are ya?

For sure, we shouldn't act like the World Police... it is unfortunate that, historically, being a superpower, forced upon us roles that we should not - ordinarily - undertake. The problem has always been, if not us, then who?

Personally, I believe in the concept of the Founders.... that America should be beacon for other countries to strive to emulate. To show how a truly free people can prosper - each individual standing on their own two feet. It may be idealistic but that doesn't mean we can't be that nation.

 

[Luissa]

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

You're not actually blaming us for WWI and II, are ya?

For sure, we shouldn't act like the World Police... it is unfortunate that, historically, being a superpower, forced upon us roles that we should not - ordinarily - undertake. The problem has always been, if not us, then who?

Personally, I believe in the concept of the Founders.... that America should be beacon for other countries to strive to emulate. To show how a truly free people can prosper - each individual standing on their own two feet. It may be idealistic but that doesn't mean we can't be that nation.

No I am not, but after WWII this country changed. And right now, I just don't think we should spend so much time and money in other countries while our country turns into a third world. There are parts of the town I live in that look like Haiti, even our own military men and women have to be a food stamps because they do not get paid enough.

 

[Luissa]

I actually disagree with having troops in Japan, and have posted that before, so why would I now argue that it was necessary?


But if you want to really learn something about the military aspet of it, I will teach you grasshopper.

Let's look at our presence in Western Europe in the 80's. Why were they there in such numbers? I mean really if the Soviets took over Germany would that affect us? No , not really. Well unless you actually think in military terms.

It's called a prepositioned defensive perimeter. With the idea being that we could fight them in Germany and if need be fall back to England and even if that didn't work out they still weren't on our home soil.

Now if WWIII breaks out, where would you rather it be fought, here in the US or anywhere else?

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

You say you're studying history in college? Good then you realize no doubt that history is cyclical. the 2010s are no different than the 80s, only the players have changed. In 2040 there will be another thread out there and it will resemble this threat only by different characters. It's the way of the world

As for world police, I agree with that, but at the same time every time something happens in the world , everyone looks at the US to solve the problem; then get's pissed at how we solve it. It's a lose/lose for us.

We either need to become a complete military state, or scale back, otherwise history has proven being spread out so much is not always a good thing.

 

[Spoonman]

1980 is a little different from 2010, the 90's are even a little different from now in Europe. And maybe if we didn't act like the World Police, WWIII won't break out.

You say you're studying history in college? Good then you realize no doubt that history is cyclical. the 2010s are no different than the 80s, only the players have changed. In 2040 there will be another thread out there and it will resemble this threat only by different characters. It's the way of the world

As for world police, I agree with that, but at the same time every time something happens in the world , everyone looks at the US to solve the problem; then get's pissed at how we solve it. It's a lose/lose for us.

We either need to become a complete military state, or scale back, otherwise history has proven being spread out so much is not always a good thing.

I'm going with the complete military state.

 

[boedicca]

Oh, I get it.

They're no longer combat troops. They must be Overseas Contingency Personnel.

 

[Luissa]

protecting our own interests =/= acting like an empire.

I got an idea, let's start a thread about coloring so that you can participate to.

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

Do we control any aspect of any of the countries in which we have a military presence in? Do we exploit the resources of any of the countries we have a military presence in? Do we influence unnaturally any of the countries we have a military presence? Do we run the government, police or military of the countries we have a military presence in?

Are you trying to say that none of these countries where we have a military presence in are FULLY independent countries, Germany, Cuba, South Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Australia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Qatar, Bahrain, Honduras, Canada etc?

How about Iraq, it seems the US and other countries are exploiting their resources, and we pretty much control their government. Do you think they can do anything without our permission or input?

 

[Spoonman]

Oh, I get it.

They're no longer combat troops. They must be Overseas Contingency Personnel.

They are kind of like mall security guards. They have a uniform but no authority to do anything.

 

[ConHog]

So you don't think having a military presence in most of the world, is not acting like an Empire?

Why don't you tell me what interests we need to protect in Japan. You seem to know so much.

Do we control any aspect of any of the countries in which we have a military presence in? Do we exploit the resources of any of the countries we have a military presence in? Do we influence unnaturally any of the countries we have a military presence? Do we run the government, police or military of the countries we have a military presence in?

Are you trying to say that none of these countries where we have a military presence in are FULLY independent countries, Germany, Cuba, South Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Australia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Qatar, Bahrain, Honduras, Canada etc?

How about Iraq, it seems the US and other countries are exploiting their resources, and we pretty much control their government. Do you think they can do anything without our permission or input?

How are we exploiting their resources? We haven't taken so much as a thimble of oil from them. We sure have subsidized gasoline to them though. Do you remember how much gasoline was here in 2006? Right around $4/gal? It was 25 cents a gallon in Iraq. Hmmm

 

[Trajan]

Oh stop with the racist, bigoted ranting. Obama kept his promise. So shut the fuck up. If he wasn't black, you'd agree with him.

and we have not gotten all the oil yet; we will shortly bomb Kirkuk and Mosul into rubble, insert the 4th ID through Turkey ( they will keep their promise this time for some of the spoils and to generally just kill Kurds) and rape them for their oil , since we drained the southern half of the country, we'll let Iran share, they will forget the bomb and all go home happy.
Praise be to the Obama for he is kind and wise.