No More Troops

[trobinett]

And at what point does the American presence in Iraq become a crutch for the Iraqis, in essence letting them get away with not getting their crap together?

Yea, that is THE question, and I for one would like an answer.:bat:

I'm for kicking butt, and our troops are sure doing that, thank you.

However, when is enough, enough?

I would like to start seeing just a little movement by the "locals" in picking up the pace of taking care of their own security.

I see a lot of "lip service", but no real RESULTS.:blah2:

I don't know, am I not seeing the WHOLE picture?:huh:

 

[Gunny]

I was a teenager back then. How did Carter have anything to do with the Vietnam war?

It wasn't Carter. It was Ford. The North Vietnamese realized that after we had pulled out lock, stock and barrel, that we wouldn't be back.

The reason it took until 1975 is that Nixon had bombed N Vietnam back into the Stone Age and it took them three years to rebuild a military. Giap himself states that we had them screwed and let them off the hook by their signing the Paris Peace Agreement.

We as a nation at that point did not have the will to honor our word and do "whatever was necessary" to stop them should N Vietnam invade.

 

[Gunny]

And at what point does the American presence in Iraq become a crutch for the Iraqis, in essence letting them get away with not getting their crap together?

Good question, and it's going to be a judgement call, and whoever makes it is going to be a target for the political opposition.

If events in Iraq were truly the results of nothing more than internal struggle, our official policy is one of nonintervention. We sure aren't helping anyone out in Sudan.

But this is more than that. Most of the rabblerousers are imports from Iran, Syria, and various terrorist organizations. That to me is EXTERNAL forces attempting to take control of a Nation. We made it. We are honor-bound to defend it.

 

[Gunny]

And at what point does the American presence in Iraq become a crutch for the Iraqis, in essence letting them get away with not getting their crap together?

Good question, and it's going to be a judgement call, and whoever makes it is going to be a target for the political opposition.

You know THAT will NEVER be accepted as the reason for leaving by the left. As far as I am concerned, once it becomes an internal-only struggle, we have no business there. But that is being logical, strategically sound, and in keeping with our official policy of non-intervention.

All of which will be clouded over in a NY minute by the left screaming "Bush failed."

So maybe WE need to get our internal politics in order first. Politics in this Nation has become a bigger farce than professional wrestling. Problem is, a LOT of people believe the crap.

So what's better for THIS country? That we cut and run and re-live the 70s with all its liberal anarchy, or that we finish what we started?

 

[nt250]

It wasn't Carter. It was Ford. The North Vietnamese realized that after we had pulled out lock, stock and barrel, that we wouldn't be back.

The reason it took until 1975 is that Nixon had bombed N Vietnam back into the Stone Age and it took them three years to rebuild a military. Giap himself states that we had them screwed and let them off the hook by their signing the Paris Peace Agreement.

We as a nation at that point did not have the will to honor our word and do "whatever was necessary" to stop them should N Vietnam invade.

I was being a little bit facetious. All I know about the Vietnam war is what I read during the last election, and from what I gather the only connection Carter had with anything to do with Vietnam at all was somehow getting John Kerry an honorable discharge 7 years after he admitted to committing treason.

But I could be wrong.

 

[Gunny]

I was being a little bit facetious. All I know about the Vietnam war is what I read during the last election, and from what I gather the only connection Carter had with anything to do with Vietnam at all was somehow getting John Kerry an honorable discharge 7 years after he admitted to committing treason.

But I could be wrong.

Unfortunately, the left has made John Kerry's verison of the Vietnam War the de facto version by perpetuating the lie for so long. He actually just capitalized on every cliche accusation that was going around at the time to jumpstart his political career. The lie itself was already in play.

 

[1549]

Unfortunately, the left has made John Kerry's verison of the Vietnam War the de facto version by perpetuating the lie for so long. He actually just capitalized on every cliche accusation that was going around at the time to jumpstart his political career. The lie itself was already in play.

There are 2 versions of the Vietnam war:

The "we would have won, America is just a bunch of pussies" view. This view is favored by Kissinger and other hawks of the period.

and there is the "winning, if at all possible, would have come at incredible costs and loss of life that would not have been justified" view.

Gunny of course does not believe in democracy and thinks the American people should not have a voice. This is why he should be shipped to Russia to work for Putin. That sort of shit does not fly in America, our government was designed to keep ultimate authority in the hands of the people.

The war in Vietnam cost 56,000 kids their lives, and Vietnam was in no way a threat to America. Worst of all, the war was instigated by a lie. The American people saw all of this and got us the fuck out.

 

[Gunny]

There are 2 versions of the Vietnam war:

The "we would have won, America is just a bunch of pussies" view. This view is favored by Kissinger and other hawks of the period.

and there is the "winning, if at all possible, would have come at incredible costs and loss of life that would not have been justified" view.

Gunny of course does not believe in democracy and thinks the American people should not have a voice. This is why he should be shipped to Russia to work for Putin. That sort of shit does not fly in America, our government was designed to keep ultimate authority in the hands of the people.

The war in Vietnam cost 56,000 kids their lives, and Vietnam was in no way a threat to America. Worst of all, the war was instigated by a lie. The American people saw all of this and got us the fuck out.

Typical liberal argument. "No threat to America." Read the rules before you spout off. A threat to one of our allies is considered a threat to us.

The "people" were wrong, and we have continued to pay a price for it. You self-righteous lefties sold this Nation down the shitter, period. You dishonored the United States.

I believe in democracy. I just don;t believe in your pussy version of it. And at least you got THAT right. You lefties are pussies, period. You sit around and suck off the freedom provided to you by your betters, then bitch about how it was gained.

 

[1549]

Typical liberal argument. "No threat to America." Read the rules before you spout off. A threat to one of our allies is considered a threat to us.

whitehouse.gov on George Washington: "In foreign affairs, he warned against long-term alliances".

South Vietnam was hardly an ally, merely an extension of our fear of communism and intent on exherting influence in the region. We paid the price for the relationship.

The "people" were wrong, and we have continued to pay a price for it. You self-righteous lefties sold this Nation down the shitter, period. You dishonored the United States.

No, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and all of the the suit and tie hawks sold this nation down the toilet.

I believe in democracy. I just don;t believe in your pussy version of it. And at least you got THAT right. You lefties are pussies, period. You sit around and suck off the freedom provided to you by your betters, then bitch about how it was gained.

What sort of democracy do you believe in? The people provide the checks and balances for all elected officials, it is the whole point of democracy. Do you hear liberals complaining that WWII was not justified? The American people protest wars like Vietnam because thousands are sent to their death for an international agenda, not for protection of American.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

He didn't. The war was over in 1975...

WRONG

 

[LuvRPgrl]

I was a teenager back then. How did Carter have anything to do with the Vietnam war?

If you notice, it is two years prior to the presidential election. What occurs is if the sitting president is not doing well in the polls or public opinion, then the party that is out of power begins attacking them on anything they can.

It occured in 1974. The off year federal elections were in full gear. I was reading the paper daily. We had won the vietnam war and N Vietnam had signed onto the paris peace accord. THe treaty was to guarantee democratic elections for vietnam.

It was also when Gerald Ford, who was NEVER ELECTED, but appointed by the disgraced Nixon, was president. Ford had also pardoned Nixon so that no criminal charges could be brought against him. He was very unpopular. The democrats were vicsously attacking the republicans for their strategy in Vietnam. We had been bombing the hell out of N Vietnam, which is what forced them to the bargaining table. CARTER was emerging as the front runner for the Democratic presidential election. He was a peace nik to the max.
It had become quite obvioius the american public at that time would favor Carter over Ford. After the peace treaty was signed, the North began attacking the south, which was contrary to what the treaty said they would do. The US had told the South, if the North attacked them again, we would supply them with weapons, tanks, etc. etc. But we didnt. Because of Carter and the other peaceniks who were attacking Ford and the Republicans, it became politically impossible to support the S Vietnamese. It is essentially identical to what is going on in Iraq right now, except the public support is still there for Bush, inlike 1975. If the losing, cut and run Democrats could garner enough support for their "plan" for Iraq, then the Republicans would have to cave in and allow Iraq to fall to the terrorists.

One of the main reasons Bush continues to have enough support, unlike Ford (Due to Carter and the Dems) is because, unlike with Vietnam, WE WERE ACTUALLY ATTACKED IN OUR OWN COUNTRY BY TERRORISTS.

The majority of the public sees the connection between Iraq and terrorism, unlike the idiotic brain dead liberals who are always screaming, Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. As though 9/11 and OBL are the beginning and the end of all of terrorism.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

There are 2 versions of the Vietnam war:

The "we would have won, America is just a bunch of pussies" view. This view is favored by Kissinger and other hawks of the period.

and there is the "winning, if at all possible, would have come at incredible costs and loss of life that would not have been justified" view.

Gunny of course does not believe in democracy and thinks the American people should not have a voice. This is why he should be shipped to Russia to work for Putin. That sort of shit does not fly in America, our government was designed to keep ultimate authority in the hands of the people.

The war in Vietnam cost 56,000 kids their lives, and Vietnam was in no way a threat to America. Worst of all, the war was instigated by a lie. The American people saw all of this and got us the fuck out.

Actuallly, GUnny favors democracy. It was the minority punk ass college student protesters for the most part that got their way because they made so much noise. Nixon, who escalated the bombing, won by a landslide in that election cycle. Unfortunately, watergate tied the hands of Nixon and Ford during that period, and both were too weak to do anything to finish off vietnam. The bombing of the north was working.

Oh, by the way, "make peace, not war" ,,,isnt that what Chamberlain said to Hitler? HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH, WHAT A FUCKING WANKER, MAKE PEACE NOT WAR. What fantasy are you from? Did you grow up in disneyland? Is the ride, "its a small world" your home?

 

[onedomino]

I thought this thread was about Iraq.

 

[Gunny]

whitehouse.gov on George Washington: "In foreign affairs, he warned against long-term alliances".

South Vietnam was hardly an ally, merely an extension of our fear of communism and intent on exherting influence in the region. We paid the price for the relationship.



No, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and all of the the suit and tie hawks sold this nation down the toilet.



What sort of democracy do you believe in? The people provide the checks and balances for all elected officials, it is the whole point of democracy. Do you hear liberals complaining that WWII was not justified? The American people protest wars like Vietnam because thousands are sent to their death for an international agenda, not for protection of American.

When the people, in their extreme fanatacism are close to destroying this Nation internally, they are WRONG, period. That is exactly what peaceniks, who you support, did. You don't see conservatives out using violence to protest violence. For some reason, you libs cannot fathom that concept. You think as long as YOU think it's right, the end justifies the means.

The US came out of WWII THE major world power, and the protector against the spread of Communism. I realize this is a hard concept for you to grasp, but why is you libs can't fathom a duty to anything beyond scratching your own asses? If it doesn't affect you HERE and NOW, it ain't happening. And screw th guy next door if he's being beaten by thugs in his front yard. Not your problem.

A completely selfish, and suicidal mentality. While you're busy walking through the world with your blinders on tight, there are those who don't give a rat's ass what you believe in and are willing to kill you to prove it. You and your blinders enable such people just as much as ANY arms dealer.

And just in case you don't think we had N Vietnam bombed to the brink of oblivion before they finally signed the Paris Peace Agreement, feel free to see what Giap himself has to say about it.

 

[Gunny]

I thought this thread was about Iraq.

Improvise, adapt and overcome.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

He didn't. The war was over in 1975...

Yea, but the presidential campaign for 1976 was well under way for quite a time already, and it had major, major influence on the policies of what we were doing in Vietnam. To deny that is to stick ones head in the sand. I remember it distinctly, a lot of my friends served in Vietnam, as I had two older brothers, and I was 18 the exact year they stopped sending draftees and volunteers over there.

The American public was very easily persuaded by our leaders, and the Dems had to oppose what the Repubs had done, WHICH HAD BEEN SUCESSFUL. Their opposistion during the campaign forced Ford to scale back activities in Vietnam to give him any shot at being elected. CARTER was, is and always will be a guy with a pussy. He is a pansy ass peacenik freak.