- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Messages
- 93,972
- Reaction score
- 69,054
- Location
- Colorado
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
He is in the fight, we've expanded our wars and violence immensely. This is infinity way NP, this is what it looks like.
You got to love this guy, he tells it like it is......we should have more senior officers like him..........
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/top-marine-obama-fight-191600744.html
Democracy is more evolutionary than revolutionary. In the U.S. we seem to have forgotten that, ignored it or maybe we never really understood it.
Iran wasn't/isn't ready, nor is Afghanistan.
The American people wisely want nothing to do with war in the Middle East. Lets keep it that way. The military is often like a kid who simply has toys they want to play with. One way to avoid that is not keep giving them so many new toys.
The US had a revolution, and afterwards the US had a "Democracy". Now it's true that over time it evolves, but a lot of governments have to start with violence.
Bush's mistake wasn't invading. Iraq was like Vietnam as far as thorns in our side. Except we had the military to crush Saddam and forever rid the world of a monster. The Iraqi people wouldn't go back to that life like black people wouldn't go back to slavery.
Bush's mistake was in not enforcing the idea that the undertaking would be something along the lines of post-WW2 Japan and Germany. we would have to stay for DECADES, not years, to pacify that country and build a stable foundation. Liberals were just salivating form day 1 to get the hell out of there, no matter the long term consequences. He should have been honest and readied the people for the long trudge ahead. Instead he made it easier for the snake oil libs to come in at the first opportunity and and tear the entire operation down, piece by piece. but as long as they are deemed "right" at the end of the story, what the hell do they care. Someone else will deal with the chaotic fallout.
I'm sorry Apache, obviously we weren't here on this message board at the time, so I can't prove this to you. But its not hindsight for ME, I was a huge outspoken critic of the plans to invade Iraq at the time, and it created quite the caustic work environment at the time, opposing it earned me the label of Taliban John, anti-American, un-patriotic, Muslim lover and more. I was right.
Ignorant of history was going into that quagmire in the first place.
If only someone in the Bush administration had seen this coming.
What happened to this guy? I liked this guy.
edited for less-douchey youtube link. (yes, moveon.org is less douchey than the other one was)
Did he say anything to that effect or is that speculation? I would like to believe McCain's personal experiences with war would make him more cautious about the costs of eternal warfare.
Not in the slightest...I think of ISIS as just another phase of Iraq changing into what it eventually will become...three countries; one Kurdish, one Sunni and one Shia.
Is it? Look at the result of Arab Democracy: You have the Muslim Brotherhood being elected in Egypt, Palestinians electing in Hamas, Iraq voting in a sectarian government that is the root of this problem.... where is Democracy in the Middle East not causing us more problems?
If you are going to argue that the US desire for oil is a cause for hostilities in the Middle east, you cannot logically turn around and deny that China's involvement in the Middle East and wanting it's oil plays no part. You can't have it both ways, but if you can't stand up to debate then that is fine. Good day to you as well.
Indeed. But democracy is a process, as it must come UP from the people, rather than DOWN on a people by being imposed on a nation by another government.
Scared populations tend to vote for the most war hawkish candidates. Its not that their Arab that makes them vote for war mongers. Its pretty much a basic human reaction.
Ahhhh the 2008 presidential candidate Joe biden proposal.
People in Egypt weren't scared when they elected in the Muslim Brotherhood. Nor were the Iraqis when they decided to vote in a sectarian leader like Maliki. So I'm not sure where your argument is coming from.
Well there is a retirement to worry about.keeping their jobs.
speaking out is likely to get you gone.
he's retiring, so he has nothing to lose.
You are partially correct in that assessment. Left to their own devices, then you would be correct in saying that it is up to them. However, Iraq was a functioning democracy while we were there because we ensured that the Sunnis wouldn't get cut out of the government. That's why these democracies that have cropped up of late keep biting us in the ass when these people keep electing radicals that want to kill everyone.
I wasn't around the DP back in 2003 either but I was on other boards and I also then didn't support putting boots on the ground in Iraq to enforce the law that Clinton signed.
I kind of agreed with the military top brass at the time, we could accomplish the first two phases for going to war, the mission being regime change but would likely fail or have problems with fulfilling the other phases that follow after accomplishing the main mission.
Bush and Rumsfeld were warned that you would need a minimum of 400,000 boots on the ground to occupy. Rumsfeld responded you go to war with the military you have.
I never cared that much for Rumsfeld, he always reminded me of McNamara.
But on the day our troops crossed the line and entered Iraq I had to support the troops because never again do I want to see Americans back stabbing our troops again like what happened during the Vietnam War.
Certainement! But then that wasn't really a democracy.
As to the other "democracies" popping up, probably not. I would not agree that they are democracies.
I'd say we achieved our objectives, and for Iraq, it was to provide them an environment in which a democracy could thrive. It's not our responsibility to run their governments. Unless we wanted to have a true imperialist attitude and actually start annexing some of these places and putting them under our rule. That's the only way people in that part of the world won't start up killing one another.
Indeed. But democracy is a process, as it must come UP from the people, rather than DOWN on a people by being imposed on a nation by another government.
It's not our responsibility to pick what type of government people should live under. In fact all of our FP is self promoting and self appointed.
It does become our concern when said created government is a threat to our National Security though.
Certainement! But then that wasn't really a democracy.
As to the other "democracies" popping up, probably not. I would not agree that they are democracies.
Of course they were scared. Their revolution made a very very unstable country out of one that was reatively stable (per the region) and when a voting populace wants stability they tend to go for the toughest talking mo-fo out there.
That didn't address your accusation that in hindsight it was easy for me to criticise the Iraq war. I made it clear that it was not hindsight. I opposed it from the outset until this moment.
Goodness, that again. Do we ever learn anything. The government of Iraq, ANY government in Iraq will not be a threat to your security or mine or our nations. You have no fear of mushroom clouds over a US city. You have far more reason to be concerned about your own government.
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?