Fogbuster

Better ask the South Vietnamese, then the Cambodians.... Then the Laotians... Then the Burmese.... Then .....



//

DarrylS

Whether we pull out in 3 months, 6 months or 6 years.. we have created a mess by interfering with a very unstable mideast problem. our presence may be doing some stop gap things, however in the long run we did not do our homework on the religious/political issues that have effected and currently efffect all of the countries.

Note the comparison to Viet Nam often, if we are so concerned as a nation of preventing genocide where are we on Darfur, Sudan, Rwanda and all of the so called "black" nations? To say this is the responsibility of the UN is just more doublespeak from the right. If we were really concerned about humanitarian efforts in the world we would do more there, however situational ethics dictates certain things and our involvement in Iraq to depose a violent dictator has not made that part of the country a better place. I am not convinced it will ever be a better place with our involvement. As much as I think Saddam should not be the leader of this country, he was able to keep the Sunni/Shiite violence in check. Where was the Moussad and CIA when we needed them a well planned coup or assassination may have accomplished the same outcome?? Did not like Saddam's methods, however we have created a mess there and despite all the talk, I do not see it getting real better soon.

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

Fogbuster

For the record, I am against the rush to war in Iraq. That's right, I was -- and remain -- against it. I even wrote a letter to Geo Bush pleading with him to use other methods to deal with the many problems that exist there. To me, going to war just plays into the hands of those who "love death more than life", as bin Laden is reported to have said; the wide-spread use of suicide attacks reveals this attitude, I would say.

I have been arguing two things:

1. That the U.S. must NOT just dis-engage from Iraq and the Middle East. What we did in Southeast Asia is sinful, leaving all those people to the communist world. I would say we also did a disservice to Korea by first aligning with Japan over Korea at the beginning of the 1900s, and then making a pact with Joseph Stalin to partition Korea in 1945. Terrible precedents that have back to haunt us in the worst way.

2. We need to be much more circumspect and far less polarized in dealing with each other as political parties; we are one nation and we need to respect one another as one nation, indivisible under God. That means we should not unduly attack the president, whether it be a Clinton or a Bush or anyone else, particularly in public. I make no bones about being opposed to many of Clinton's practices -- his allowing hi-tech secrets to go to China during his watch is the worst thing he did, although his defilement of the White House with his sexual shenanigans was also unacceptable -- but I never went out crying for his ridicule or even impeachment.

We are one nation, one family. We need to find a way to create the atmosphere where all feel loved and respected as sons and daughters of God. That's how I see it.


//

godef

Nothing that would have happened had we never invaded Iraq on false pretenses in the first place.

__________________
See you at Super Bowl XLVI!

godef

Why is it always left out that this vote took place under the false pretenses of immediate danger from Iraq by the president?

So America does eventually pull out of Iraq, and it falls apart as you predict. The blame would lay strictly on the Bush administration.

__________________
See you at Super Bowl XLVI!

mr3putt

Better ask the South Vietnamese, then the Cambodians.... Then the Laotians... Then the Burmese.... Then .....

We were not publically intervening in those countires during the Viet Nam war. Nixon denied any incursions into those countires. Military activities were covert and without sanction from Congress. You cannot throw the subsequent suffering of these people into one big soup.

If you consider the use of unilateral military intervention by the US for the purpose of toppling tyranical regimes as proper foreign policy then you sir are in a distinct political minority.

Answer my challenge on Iraq Foggy.
UAE...Qatar..Jordan....cmon..... I'm waiting

Fogbuster

The point is NOT whether we are or are not publicly officially involved in other countries, ME or anywhere else. The point is about *STABILITY and NORMAL RELATIONS* with these Islamic nations.

We, the U.S., must learn how to develop better, closer, more sincere relations with our Islamic brethren. We've separated for too long. Right now we've removed one bad apple in Saddam Hussein; Bush took it one step further than Reagan did when he bombed Moamar Khaddafi's home in Tripoli -- Bush actually got Saddam, arrested him and turned him over to an Iraqi court for trial.

If we do not follow up in Iraq to ensure that the rule of law under a stable government is instituted, we are going to get a hellacious backlash from the militants who would make this into the biggest propaganda coup since the U.S. quit Vietnam. The different Islamist groups, al qaida, the radical Sunni, and the radical Shi'a, will all think the U.S. is powerless if we do not stay to establish a government that can stand on its own two feet. That's the problem.


//

mr3putt

We are powerless to enforce democratic principles on a population that prefers to see their world in religious not secular terms. We wave the Constitution at them and they wave the Koran.

You can quote Lincoln and Jefferson..and Chamberlain all you want...
Iraq's aren't listening...you can't save those who are hell bent on anarchy.

That's the problem

All_Around_Brown

He is a bold LIAR isn't he??

This is not a new strategy. For one, it is a tactic. But chucklehead america probably doesn tknow the difference either.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Fogbuster

No, there is a way. It's not just the "American way", either. There is a way to take the good from the Koranic tradition and put it together with the good of the Christian tradition. We are all children of Abraham. We need to find the way to get along *peacefully*.

I say inter-marriage is the way. Hard to hate the grand-children, no matter who their father/mother is. I've seen it work in my family.


//