Lets stay out of anymore middle eastern wars

[Borillar]

No country has ever achieved greatness by withdrawing into its borders.


That isnt a reason to get involved in every conflict but it does suggest picking and choosing fights. I dont know what the right answer on Syria is, both sides suck. But Obama drew a red line in the sand and Assad crossed it. If he doesnt do anything he will have even less credibility than he does now.

If by "greatness" you mean maintaining a global military empire, then we're pretty ******* great. As it is, we don't seen to know how to not get involved in other peoples battles. We should only involve ourselves in situations where our national interest is involved. I don't think Syria falls under that category.

 

[NoNukes]

Lets stay out of anymore Islamic middle eastern wars as we lose nothing but blood and treasure. For what??? To be hated for it.

For these ******* cock suckers to kill our troops and spit at us 5 years after we choose to invade. Hey Saudi Arabia or Pakistan??? Where are you doing to help your people?

We all ******* know these bastards will be bitching about human rights when we try to help them.
We all ******* know the violence won't stop!

So let's stay home and spend the MONEY on infrastructure, science and technology on America. How about it Barack???? Going back to the ******* moon and mars makes a lot more sense as it would bring more high paid jobs for Americans.

Building roads
Building bridges
Building our educational system

All makes sense

This ******* doesn't.

**** you arabs! Fix your own country...America aint your butt boy.

I don't give a damn if Assad uses all his chemical Weapons....America doesn't need to be the only nation holding this world together.

I agree that America should stay out of the war in Syria. However, it appears that America is being expected to lead the way. This is not Obama's fault.

 

[Katzndogz]

I can think of several countries that are pretty great but dont get involved in every tom, dick and harry fight out there. Some, only fight over the land nearest to their "borders" and nothing more. Presumably they will never achieve greatness.

Really? Name 3. Switzerland doesnt count.

Norway, Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand, Netherlands. Oh... and Switzerland.

Do you call these great countries? They are hardly world leaders and no one would look to any of them for any kind of support.

 

[The Rabbi]

No country has ever achieved greatness by withdrawing into its borders.


That isnt a reason to get involved in every conflict but it does suggest picking and choosing fights. I dont know what the right answer on Syria is, both sides suck. But Obama drew a red line in the sand and Assad crossed it. If he doesnt do anything he will have even less credibility than he does now.

If by "greatness" you mean maintaining a global military empire, then we're pretty ******* great. As it is, we don't seen to know how to not get involved in other peoples battles. We should only involve ourselves in situations where our national interest is involved. I don't think Syria falls under that category.

But the Middle East does. And since Syria is part of it we have some interest in seeing stability.
What the right course to achieve that is, I dont know.

 

[NoNukes]

Funny, things went to hell about the time we announced a complete withdrawl. Wonder why that happened?

Considering the complete withdrawal was due to the Iraqi's not having any "love" for us, there is no correlation. Furthermore, that's not when it "went to shit". I'd suggest reading up on it and speaking less. That place is a rubbed raw, infected shithole.

No, it was due to the incompetence of the Obama Administration and the anti-anti-terror Left, of which the narco-libtards are a part. Had he negotiated a small contingent to stay behind this probably wouldn't have happened.
I'd suggest getting your head out of Ron Paul's ass and seeing what happens when we withdraw our involvement from places. Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc.

You mean when America withdraws from places it should not have been in the first place?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Funny, things went to hell about the time we announced a complete withdrawl. Wonder why that happened?

Considering the complete withdrawal was due to the Iraqi's not having any "love" for us, there is no correlation. Furthermore, that's not when it "went to shit". I'd suggest reading up on it and speaking less. That place is a rubbed raw, infected shithole.

No, it was due to the incompetence of the Obama Administration and the anti-anti-terror Left, of which the narco-libtards are a part. Had he negotiated a small contingent to stay behind this probably wouldn't have happened.
I'd suggest getting your head out of Ron Paul's ass and seeing what happens when we withdraw our involvement from places. Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc.

Wrong again. But keep trying. Even a broken clock gets it right twice a day. There was no negotiating a stay in Iraq. No troops would have been immune to Iraqi laws. Thats why we withdrew. That in part, came after the releaseof informatin by Manning. Iraq has been a festering shithole since Saddam was overthrown. We should have left that turd alone instead of poking it on vendetta for Bush Sr. failures in earlier time. Well, that and the PNAC.

 

[The Rabbi]

Really? Name 3. Switzerland doesnt count.

Norway, Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand, Netherlands. Oh... and Switzerland.

Do you call these great countries? They are hardly world leaders and no one would look to any of them for any kind of support.

They're great countries. Especially if you consider surstromming a contribution to the world.

 

[The Rabbi]

Considering the complete withdrawal was due to the Iraqi's not having any "love" for us, there is no correlation. Furthermore, that's not when it "went to shit". I'd suggest reading up on it and speaking less. That place is a rubbed raw, infected shithole.

No, it was due to the incompetence of the Obama Administration and the anti-anti-terror Left, of which the narco-libtards are a part. Had he negotiated a small contingent to stay behind this probably wouldn't have happened.
I'd suggest getting your head out of Ron Paul's ass and seeing what happens when we withdraw our involvement from places. Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc etc.

Wrong again. But keep trying. Even a broken clock gets it right twice a day. There was no negotiating a stay in Iraq. No troops would have been immune to Iraqi laws. Thats why we withdrew. That in part, came after the releaseof informatin by Manning. Iraq has been a festering shithole since Saddam was overthrown. We should have left that turd alone instead of poking it on vendetta for Bush Sr. failures in earlier time. Well, that and the PNAC.

Wrong. Bush left the final negotiation for status of forces up to Obama, who promptly blundered and ran for the exit.
I guess we should just have let Saddam go on poking the UN in the eye, bribing the French and Germans, and exporting terrorism.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Huh uh. Well, according to you, the place was awesome until we withdrew. Which is a total fuckin' lie.

 

[The Rabbi]

Huh uh. Well, according to you, the place was awesome until we withdrew. Which is a total fuckin' lie.

Uh according to you it was always a shithole and we made it worse.
You can't lie your way to the truth, wookie-boy.

 

[bendog]

It may interesting that Samantha Powers is probably at odds with the admin in that she is an interventionist. Persoanlly, I thought Rwanda was a pity, but chancing a RCT of the 82 AB doing a Little Big Horn wasn't worth the risk, imo.

 

[U2Edge]

I can think of several countries that are pretty great but dont get involved in every tom, dick and harry fight out there. Some, only fight over the land nearest to their "borders" and nothing more. Presumably they will never achieve greatness.

Part of the reason why any country is able to achieve "greatness" today is being successful within the global economy. But that global economy requires a certain amount of stability and while these "great" countries may not get involved in security issues around the world, someone else is doing the work for them!

yes, we're well known around the world for our stabilization efforts.

The oil and natural gas flow from the Persian gulf with much less concern today now that Saddam's regime is gone.

Afghanistan currently has the strongest most capable government in its history and has made more progress in human development than any other country since 2000. Of course, part of the reason for this is their poor history and starting from such a low point in 2000.

Taiwan and South Korea remain independent of China and North Korea.

The Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union are no more. Capitalism and democracy has spread into Eastern Europe. Now nearly all of eastern Europe that used to be within the Soviet orbit are now apart of NATO!

Bosnia used to be in a hellish Civil War. Now you have a united peaceful country that may soon join NATO and The European Union.

Kosovo was once a hotbed of sectarian violence, now its an independent country moving forward!

Every since the United States helped create the United Nations, NATO, the IMF, and World Bank, there has not been any World Wars and or great depressions like that seen in the 1930s!

So yes, the United States is well known around the world for its stabilization efforts, for if not for the United States military and its allies, the world would be living under Lenin/Stalin Soviet Communism or burned to a nuclear crisp!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Huh uh. Well, according to you, the place was awesome until we withdrew. Which is a total fuckin' lie.

Uh according to you it was always a shithole and we made it worse.
You can't lie your way to the truth, wookie-boy.

That's not according to me. That's according to the facts, Rubbi.

 

[U2Edge]

Part of the reason why any country is able to achieve "greatness" today is being successful within the global economy. But that global economy requires a certain amount of stability and while these "great" countries may not get involved in security issues around the world, someone else is doing the work for them!

yes, we're well known around the world for our stabilization efforts.

You mean shock and awe didn't work to pacify the ME?

Kuwait sleeps much better at night now that Saddam is gone. The oil and natural gas also flows in greater volumes and is not at risk of being seized or sabotaged by the neighbors.

 

[U2Edge]

You mean shock and awe didn't work to pacify the ME?

Yeah actually it did when we were practicing it. That's why al Qaeda got their asses kicked in Iraq, we restored some stability to the country, giving it the first free elections ever, and we neutralized Ghaddafi's nuclear program.
After that some yellow belly anti American got into office and pissed all of that away promising a kinder gentler America to people who scorn weakness.

Oh, yeah. Definitely.

Iraq is FAR less stable now than it was before we entered. Even the biggest proponents of that war agree. Like Paul W.

The terroists in Iraq, after ten years of practice, are the best in the world. There is no substitute when it comes to spawning the best terrorists. The USA is #1!

Apparently you stopped reading about Iraq once....oh, I dont think you ever did. Because that place is a blistering shithole now. Far more than it was when we entered. But like Paul, I'm sure you think we should just give it another 50 years or so...thats when the merits of the war will come to fruition.

Iraqi oil and natural gas production have reached the highest levels every the countries history. Higher than at any time while Saddam was in power.

Iraqi Shia and Kurdish sections of the country are experiencing the highest level of prosperity in their history. It is only the 20% Sunni Arab Iraq where things are worse primarily because they now have to share the oil wealth with the other 80% of the country.

Parts of Iraq that never had electricity or plumbing now have it. No longer do the Sunni Arab's get to hord the electrical grid.

Without any United States troops on the ground, Iraq is managing its own security problems which are a fraction of what they were six years ago.

Saddam was responsible for the deaths of 1.3 million people in the region, launching 4 invasions and attacks on other countries, seizing and destroying world oil supply, firing ballistic missiles at other countries, using WMD on other countries, and being the first leader in history since ADOLF HITLER to invade and annex another country.

Nope, the world, and Iraq are far better without Saddam!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

OIl and gas...oil and gas. Yeah, we get it. Still you're nuts. the country is far less stable than it was before we entered that fucked up war.

 

[U2Edge]

OIl and gas...oil and gas. Yeah, we get it. Still you're nuts. the country is far less stable than it was before we entered that fucked up war.

That might be the conclusion of people who are ignorant of Iraqi history prior to 2003. 1979 to 2003 was not a time of great stability for Iraq or the Persian Gulf, unless of course you consider Iranian troops on your soil and Iranian aircraft and missiles bombing your cities to be stability. Or going to war with a superpower and then being bombed every year by that super power while the interenational community attempts, at least initially to put the entire country under massive international sanctions and embargo. People starve, revolt, get killed and executed by Saddam. Nearly 300,000 Shia Arab's massacred by Saddam in the spring summer of 1991. Several hundred thousand Kurds driven into the mountains. Yep, great times in Iraq indeed!

Oh, as for oil and natural gas, I assume you use electricity, drive a car, and eat food from the supermarket, correct? The Price you pay for using those things every day is heavily impacted by oil and gas from the Persian Gulf!

 

[francoHFW]

The GOP have been total lying incompetent feck ups since 1980. See Voodoo, S+L, Raygun pals with Saddam and OBLaden, April telling Saddam we weren't interested in their border dispute with Kuwait- then Booosh with 9/11, ruin of Afghan victory with Iraq mess, the cronyism and corruption meltdown, and now Rush Seanbeck etc etc in charge of the GOP mindless obstruction.

In fact, only the independant Ike wasn't a disaster since Teddy Roosevelt LOL...

 

[francoHFW]

The GOP just hates democracy- Dulles's coups in Honduras, Nicaraugua, Iran, Kissinger's in Chile, Argentina, Greece etc etc set those countries on downward spirals. "Stability" under dictatorships in highly and myopically overrated.

 

[The Rabbi]

Huh uh. Well, according to you, the place was awesome until we withdrew. Which is a total fuckin' lie.

Uh according to you it was always a shithole and we made it worse.
You can't lie your way to the truth, wookie-boy.

That's not according to me. That's according to the facts, Rubbi.

I am not sure what constitutes "facts" in your universe. Perhaps the words of Ron Paul. In the real world we look at what actually happened. Like here:
Iraq's First Free Election Since 1953 Draws 8 Million (Update3) - Bloomberg