your opinion is that the current plan will result in a victory over IS and a stable Iraq? if not, what do you support doing, and where is the regional historical evidence that it will work? how much will it cost? are you willing to pay significantly higher taxes to fund it?
As if you were a qualified judge.
Failed debate tactic is still failing.
That the CIA supported the Baath party rise to power in Iraq is almost common knowledge, especially among people older than, say, 20.
Somebody's ground forces will have to be involved. Hopefully not ours, however it was stupid for Obama to telegraph his punches and publicly rule out US ground forces. ISIS can and will be defeated. Their own brutality will be their downfall. No tax increases needed. Just restore the funding that Obama and the democrats stupidly cut from the military budget.
So are many others. Who we choose to accept as valid or not tends to fall down party lines, which, in my opinion, is asinine.
At the end of the day, we know only what we are told, unless we WORKED for the CIA in the 60s. Me? I'll believe the photo of Saddam shaking hands with american leadership..
All of this, this entire mess in the middle east has been going on for centuries. It sounds cruel, and maybe it makes me an empathy lacking son of a bitch, but I wish we could just take all of their oil, and forget every last one of those **** suckers, including Israel. Forget them, let them continue murdering each other in God's name. I'm sick of it. To the point of wanting Mecca AND Jerusalem destroyed, cratered, turned into a giant parking lot.
I supported Afghanistan. I felt that we had some great opportunities but dropped the ball. Now it is a mess.
I DID NOT support Iraq in any way, shape or form. Not once. Not from the beginning.
I support going in and ****ing up ISIS 100% as long as others provide at least an equal number of boots.
Obama was trying to impress the warhawks, and that's the only reason he supported a surge in Afghanistan. The GOP ran a campaign against him and constantly challenged him to say a surge in Iraq worked, which it didn't. Iraq is still ****ed up, obviously. Both surges were nothing more than BS American politics.
That, and Americans that had the **** scared out of them by rhetoric like, "do we have to wait for the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud over a US city"? Which was stated when it was apparent that even with the unprecedented access Hans Blix had, he could find no WMD.
The middle east has always been chaotic. There has always been war. Even before the Crusades.
The only reason we give a **** is because they're drowning in oil. No oil? We go back to ignoring them, like we had been doing for the last 300 years prior to the demand for oil.
Think about it. Most of the middle east ascribes to a religion that places very little value on human life. It is, as a culture, antiquated to the extreme, BY DESIGN. Think of them as almost being violent Amish. When you way of life dictated by tenants that are a thousand years expired, and your leaders are indoctrinated and compelled to INDOCTRINATE those very same tenants upon their populace, this is what happens.
Imagine what THIS country would look like if each individual interpretation of Christianity had the added belief that all the OTHERS were infidels who cannot be suffered to live...at least not in the same vicinity as themselves.
so you're not willing to pay more in taxes to fund this new war?
i don't support putting any more wars on the credit card. if it's worth fighting, it's worth funding. wartime tax rates should go into effect every time there is a military action, and these increases should be significant. perhaps then the public would be less complacent about endless war.
Agreed. The ME has always been relatively unstable. Western meddling only magnified that.The middle east has always been chaotic. There has always been war. Even before the Crusades.
The only reason we give a **** is because they're drowning in oil. No oil? We go back to ignoring them, like we had been doing for the last 300 years prior to the demand for oil.
Think about it. Most of the middle east ascribes to a religion that places very little value on human life. It is, as a culture, antiquated to the extreme, BY DESIGN. Think of them as almost being violent Amish. When you way of life dictated by tenants that are a thousand years expired, and your leaders are indoctrinated and compelled to INDOCTRINATE those very same tenants upon their populace, this is what happens.
Imagine what THIS country would look like if each individual interpretation of Christianity had the added belief that all the OTHERS were infidels who cannot be suffered to live...at least not in the same vicinity as themselves.
Wikipedia can be edited by the reader...the New York times is a joke. And the UPI correspondent posted a story off the rumor mill. Post it from a mainstream US news source and I will take it seriously. I could not find it on any mainstream US site. Not even the left wing CNN. I don't doubt that the CIA had connections to Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war. I just do not buy the fantasy that the CIA groomed Saddam or the Baath Party into power
so you're not willing to pay more in taxes to fund this new war?
i don't support putting any more wars on the credit card. if it's worth fighting, it's worth funding. wartime tax rates should go into effect every time there is a military action, and these increases should be significant. perhaps then the public would be less complacent about endless war.
But the NYTimes is MSM!! So is the LATimes.
In fact, Hussein's exile ended in 1963, when his Baathist colleagues seized power with covert U.S. assistance. "We rode to power on a CIA train," the party's secretary general, Ali Saleh Saadi, admitted later.
So long to `our' tyrant - Los Angeles Times
Blix had unprecedented access? Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! He was handled like a poodle. The Iraqis had the inspector's rooms bugged and knew were they were going, practically before they did.
Yep! That and the draft would go a long way to curb war.
Only thing I have to say about a draft is that if such a thing ever occurred again - any form of conscription by the wealthy should be made illegal with mandatory federal max prison jail time. As well, military special treatment should be frowned upon - put them on the front lines with everyone else.
Everything our government does these days in on the credit card. Social Security checks are on the credit card. Welfare entitlements are on the credit card. It's not military ventures that is breaking the bank. It's the runaway entitlement system. We have nearly 50 million Americans on food stamps.
Yep! That and the draft would go a long way to curb war.
I'm against a draft in all but the direst of circumstances.
Why is that.
Because the fight to get rid of it was long and difficult, and putting it back in place would be a huge step backwards.
If you think it will result in the elite waging war more carefully, you're wrong. They will still be able to keep their kids away from the front lines, draft or no.
Perhaps we should return to the model in which the king and his noblemen led the troops into battle. I bet Congress and the executive branch would become absolute peaceniks if that was the case.
The middle east has always been chaotic. There has always been war. Even before the Crusades.
The only reason we give a **** is because they're drowning in oil. No oil? We go back to ignoring them, like we had been doing for the last 300 years prior to the demand for oil.
Think about it. Most of the middle east ascribes to a religion that places very little value on human life. It is, as a culture, antiquated to the extreme, BY DESIGN. Think of them as almost being violent Amish. When you way of life dictated by tenants that are a thousand years expired, and your leaders are indoctrinated and compelled to INDOCTRINATE those very same tenants upon their populace, this is what happens.
Imagine what THIS country would look like if each individual interpretation of Christianity had the added belief that all the OTHERS were infidels who cannot be suffered to live...at least not in the same vicinity as themselves.
Mr Fail,The New York times is considered mainstream...however it also just barely above tabloid.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?