steveox
Well-Known Member
Everytime pocketfullofshells speaks god kills a kitten
Will you please think of the kittens?
Will you please think of the kittens?
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
If You Don't Do It Right The First Time, You Always Have To Do It Over
- Thread starter GBFan
- Start date
Werbung:
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Yes, so you should listen when I say you are one
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Better then being a dumb ass that pretends to understand a Religion, then holds that Religions Beliefs against someone who does not follow it. You want to play that stupid game, evryone is also Born a Muslim in the Koran..so your a Muslim...Feel free to selectivity ignore that.
GBFan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 1,455
That's it ??? THAT is the best you can do?
Man ... you ain't even worth the effort.
Texas_tea
Well-Known Member
Maybe he has "four degrees" too .....
GBFan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 1,455
Maybe he has "four degrees" too .....
Yes, but 'four degrees' of what, you might ask ....
Separation from Vladimir Lenin ?
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Maybe he has "four degrees" too .....
let me know if you pass Kindergarten, or they call it in Texas...College.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
best you got? really?
Texas_tea
Well-Known Member
This is the voice of reason ..... any other statement past this is irrelevant!
That violence and civil war would come back to Iraq was totally predictable. It was predictable when we invaded, expecting a short effort followed by the US being seen as "liberators" in a nation that has never been united. It was predictable when we deposed the government of Saddam Hussain and left a power vacuum. It was predictable when the U. S. voters got sick and tired of supporting the war, when the troop withdrawal was negotiated back in '07, when it was carried out later, it was predictable that Iraq would descend into violence and civil war.
Now what? Do we continue to fight there indefinitely, do we let them fight it out among themselves and hope the extremists don't prevail? Do we send in air support? Do we give arms to the Iraqi government?
There are no good options. The best option was to have stayed out of Iraq to begin with, but that ship has sailed.
Now what? Do we continue to fight there indefinitely, do we let them fight it out among themselves and hope the extremists don't prevail? Do we send in air support? Do we give arms to the Iraqi government?
There are no good options. The best option was to have stayed out of Iraq to begin with, but that ship has sailed.
Texas_tea
Well-Known Member
*uck that ..... they are the enemy. My Grandfather who fought at the battle of the Bulge told me there were many of them that needed killing!
There is your shocking answer as a modern day passivist!
I will agree we need to stay out but, when it affects our Freedom and Liberties send them on the wheel of karma .... it is the natural order!
Passivism is not nor ever will be a solution to sh*t!
Werbung:
GBFan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 1,455
... and I disagree. It only became predictable when we left Iraq for political gain, not giving the popularly elected government sufficient time to establish the infrastructure (both military and economic) necessary to sustain freedom.
Fight it out indefinitely? Hardly ... the military could - if allowed - go in and subdue the whole country in a matter of months. But, the methodology, and the result, would be socially unacceptable. It would require the complete subjugation of Iraq - set up a US military government for a finite period of time, and THEN go about rebuilding the country, politically, socially, and economically.
The reason it didn't happen the first time was because of our unwillingness to fight to win - everybody wanted to be a nice guy, buy their love, if you will. It just doesn't work -- never has, and never will.
When we look at your options ...
1) "do we let them fight it out among themselves" - it depends on what the perceived goal should be. Let's keep in mind that we have two different factions - neither of which represent the will of the Iraqi people - who are merely engaged in a power struggle to see who should be next to rape and pillage the land and people of Iraq. It is nonsensical to think that the extremists won't prevail - they are, after all, willing to expend all in order to win. There's nothing more difficult than fighting a zealot - they don't know when they're beaten, therefore, they are never beaten.
If our goal is to not be involved, then we should just let them fight it out - knowing that, sometime in our children's time, we will be forced to fight whoever wins.
2) 'send in air support' - Again, the only way we can do that is if the current government agrees to become all-inclusive. We can use our air support to force a stalemate (which is a viable and simple effort), but can't be perceived to be supporting one side of the other.
3) 'arms to the Iraqi government' - Totally unacceptable. It isn't our job to prop up a corrupt or ineffective government that doesn't represent all the Iraqis.
As for your assumption that the right answer was to 'have stayed out of Iraq' - I think history will prove you wrong.
Similar threads
