Do we need military bases in foreign countrie?

[Unkotare]

land bases are obsolete and a waste of money.

if the host country wants us there, they should pay the entire bill.

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

 

[Redfish]

land bases are obsolete and a waste of money.

if the host country wants us there, they should pay the entire bill.

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE is not WE.

You claim we have a national interest in Korea and Taiwan. I want you to tell us what it is and exactly what negative things would happen if north korea took south korea and china took taiwan.

Tell us what our national interest is in those places or admit that you have no idea why we are there.

 

[Redfish]

You have been answered many times now. You just don't like the answer, and in your deep stupidity you think you can get a different one if you keep asking. You're brain dead.

actually you are brain dead because ....

...because you don't like the answer. Yeah, yeah, we get it already. Give it a rest, douchebag.

"because" is not an answer, dipshit.

 

[Infidel]

land bases are obsolete and a waste of money.

if the host country wants us there, they should pay the entire bill.

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE shouldn't want to be there, there's no point. What are the troops in Saudi Arabia doing there anyways?

 

[Redfish]

We have a vested interest in having other free democracies on Earth. And as the leader of the free world ask yourself what is in our best interests and what should we be obliged to do?

To help others gain and maintain their freedom?

To help them stand up to Communism?

To help protect the supplies of oil to our trading partners?

To make sure that in any circumstances when a small revolt or insurrection might explode into something bigger and much worse that we would eventually have to solve when it was mush costlier to do in blood and treasure, having bases in those countries allows us a smart and less expensive way of preventing major problems we'd have to deal with later.

I understand that that is the rhetoric put forth by both parties for the last 70 years or so.

but are we better off because of what we sacrificed in viet nam, kosovo, iraq, afghanistan, libya?

You have to consider each one individually.

But, without even Googling, I can make an argument that each of them HAS made us better off.

Except Libya.

Too soon.

We have to wait to see if the MSM begins to act like real journalists again.

Until then we will never know the story of Libya.



No one could have seriously expected the US to exercise a goal line defense for Ukraine.

The country was once one of Russia's fellow states. The population on the East of the Dnieper River WANT Russia to govern them.

have our bases prevented the slaughter in africa?

In the areas where they exert an influence they do.

Your question might argue for even MORE bases in the parts of Africa where slaughters have taken place except that you then must ask yourself, what is our actual interest in having a base there?"

Oil is a good reason. But in that part of Africa we might have no good reasons to be there. That means there will likely continue to be slaughters.

have our bases prevented the muslim radicals from taking control of most of the mid east?

In Iraq they did. In Kuwait they did. In Saudi Arabia they did.

In the rest of the Mid East we'd have to ask where do we have bases?

none of that is true, we are hated in those countries, most of them want us out--but they do like the money we spend with them.

the bullshit about stopping the spread of communism is what cost us 58,000 lives and billiions of dollars for nothing in viet nam. should we repeat that stupidity?

 

[longknife]

Look at this and take some time to think about it.

 

[Mojo2]

land bases are obsolete and a waste of money.

if the host country wants us there, they should pay the entire bill.

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE shouldn't want to be there, there's no point. What are the troops in Saudi Arabia doing there anyways?

There at the Saudi's invitation so they can protect their oil from anyone and everyone who'd want to take over, a La Saddam or to disrupt the oil flows to our trading partners.

Half our membership need to brush up on their current events.

 

[R.C. Christian]

in the dirty East Chink Sea .....

There is no body of water by that name, you juvenile ******* lamebrain.

If I wanted to pull your chain you sack of shit I'd have brought my ******* tweezers.

 

[longknife]

This is one point where I agree with Ron Paul.

We should shut down every one of our foreign military bases and bring the troops home. Every one of them excluding those US Marines acting as embassy guards.

Spend the money on protecting our borders and creating a totally mobile force to protect Americans abroad on legitimate business.

 

[Unkotare]

You claim we have a national interest in Korea and Taiwan. I want you to tell us what it is and exactly what negative things would happen if north korea [sic] took south korea [sic] and china [sic] took taiwan [sic].

I have already answered that question many times on more than one of your threads where you demonstrate how stupid you can be. I'm not going to keep repeating myself just because you're insane and think a new answer will eventually come out. Seek professional help.

 

[Redfish]

This is one point where I agree with Ron Paul.

We should shut down every one of our foreign military bases and bring the troops home. Every one of them excluding those US Marines acting as embassy guards.

Spend the money on protecting our borders and creating a totally mobile force to protect Americans abroad on legitimate business.

finally, someone who is thinking

 

[Unkotare]

in the dirty East Chink Sea .....

There is no body of water by that name, you juvenile ******* lamebrain.

If I wanted to pull your chain you sack of shit I'd have brought my ******* tweezers.

Time to grow up, asshole.

 

[Unkotare]

land bases are obsolete and a waste of money.

if the host country wants us there, they should pay the entire bill.

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE shouldn't want to be there, there's no point.

We most certainly should and there most certainly is.

 

[R.C. Christian]

There is no body of water by that name, you juvenile ******* lamebrain.

If I wanted to pull your chain you sack of shit I'd have brought my ******* tweezers.

Time to grow up, asshole.

Time to grow a pair you coward.

 

[Redfish]

You claim we have a national interest in Korea and Taiwan. I want you to tell us what it is and exactly what negative things would happen if north korea [sic] took south korea [sic] and china [sic] took taiwan [sic].

I have already answered that question many times on more than one of your threads where you demonstrate how stupid you can be. I'm not going to keep repeating myself just because you're insane and think a new answer will eventually come out. Seek professional help.

"its in our national interest" is not an answer. I asked you about two specific countries and you come back with nonsensical bullshit.

last chance: what is our natonal interest in protecting south korea from north korea?

what is our national interest in protecting taiwan from china?

maintaining the flow of Hyundais and kias is not the answer for korea
and maintaining the flow of cheap consumer goods that compete with american goods is not the answer for taiwan.

 

[Redfish]

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE shouldn't want to be there, there's no point.

We most certainly should and there most certainly is.

Then tell us why, and what is the point?

simply making the statement just makes you look more ignorant than you usually do.

WHY is it in our national interest?

 

[Unkotare]

If I wanted to pull your chain you sack of shit I'd have brought my ******* tweezers.

Time to grow up, asshole.

Time to grow a pair you coward.

Being a pissy little racist is evidence of cowardice, asshole, and you have provided ample amounts of such evidence.

 

[Unkotare]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/339196-what-gives-us-the-right-43.html#post8709725

 

[Redfish]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/339196-what-gives-us-the-right-43.html#post8709725

LOL, stupid answer in that thread and no answer here. We can do all of those things without land bases all over the world.

If we had a sane energy policy we would not have to worry about the flow of oil from the arabs, russians, and venezuelans.

BTW, our bases in South Korea and Taiwan have nothing to do with oil or shipping lanes.

 

[Infidel]

WE want to be there as well, you idiot. You've been told this.

WE shouldn't want to be there, there's no point. What are the troops in Saudi Arabia doing there anyways?

There at the Saudi's invitation so they can protect their oil from anyone and everyone who'd want to take over, a La Saddam or to disrupt the oil flows to our trading partners.

Half our membership need to brush up on their current events.

"There at the Saudi's invitation so they can protect their oil from anyone", "their oil" meaning the US' oil? Hmmm, don't think so.

Some members need to brush up on "there" grammar.