That was fighting an actual army. This is fighting an ideology.

 

I would argue the Nazi agenda was an ideology as were the axis parties intentions. We left support to allow stability and reconstruction of their society's. Abandoning Iraq in such a sensitive state was a mistake period. Saying going into Iraq was a mistake is a point I can respect. But at the Sametime you have to admit the exit strategy of Obama was a failure. It has directly led to the instability in the area.

I would argue the Nazi agenda was an ideology as were the axis parties intentions. We left support to allow stability and reconstruction of their society's. Abandoning Iraq in such a sensitive state was a mistake period. Saying going into Iraq was a mistake is a point I can respect. But at the Sametime you have to admit the exit strategy of Obama was a failure. It has directly led to the instability in the area.

 

They were still an Army. They had a uniform. We knew who the enemy was. When the Japanese attacked, they had a military. We can defeat a military, not an ideology. As for the bolded, yes Obama had failed in that regard. Like I said, we have leaders that do not know how to wage war. I stand by the notion that we cannot rush off to war like we did. The two plans so far is to commit a lot of troops and then leave to have a power vacuum, then the other plan is to stay there as long as possible sucking up money and troops lives. Fighting a "Global War on Terror" is like fighting the war on the drugs.

Edited January 24, 201511 yr by jrfrank56

They were still an Army. They had a uniform. We knew who the enemy was. When the Japanese attacked, they had a military. We can defeat a military, not an ideology. As for the bolded, yes Obama had failed in that regard. Like I said, we have leaders that do not know how to wage war. I stand by the notion that we cannot rush off to war like we did. The two plans so far is to commit a lot of troops and then leave to have a power vacuum, then the other plan is to stay there as long as possible sucking up money and troops lives. Fighting a "Global War on Terror" is like fighting the war on the drugs.

 

Again, you have no solution.

 

Obama has largely ignored terrorism, other than some drone strikes here and there. His ineptitude has allowed ISIS/ISIL to flourish. They are an army with an ideology.

 

We will just have to disagree. I believe that you defend those that cannot defend themselves. I consider that part of the character of being a man.

Again, you have no solution.

 

Obama has largely ignored terrorism, other than some drone strikes here and there. His ineptitude has allowed ISIS/ISIL to flourish. They are an army with an ideology.

 

We will just have to disagree. I believe that you defend those that cannot defend themselves. I consider that part of the character of being a man.

 

Neither do you. One part of the problem is that we do not need to send the huge amount of troops that both administrations have done and failed. I think it is time to admit that from the very jump Iraq and Afghanistan was doomed to fail. The financial part was gonna cost us more than we wanted to "win" because to go "all out" would have burdened us and bring us more into debt. Then there is the people we choose to help prop up the government like Karzai and the sunni vs shia problem that happened when we picked a side. Then there is the fact in Afghanistan that those people don't even like each other. We could sink all the money and troops we want into this thing. It is not gonna stop four random people hatching up a terrorist plan in their basement. We can stop plans like that from happening, but it doesn't require an immense amount of money or troops. I consider that part the character of a man who uses logic.

We should have sent our Sec. Of State over to give Sadaam and Osama big hugs.

We should have sent our Sec. Of State over to give Sadaam and Osama big hugs.

 

what do you suggest we do then? It is obvious that it is wishful thinking on our part to think we can continue to go to war the way we do and expect a different outcome. Getting Osama didn't require 100,000 troops. Or is that a difficult concept to grasp.

Neither do you. One part of the problem is that we do not need to send the huge amount of troops that both administrations have done and failed. I think it is time to admit that from the very jump Iraq and Afghanistan was doomed to fail. The financial part was gonna cost us more than we wanted to "win" because to go "all out" would have burdened us and bring us more into debt. Then there is the people we choose to help prop up the government like Karzai and the sunni vs shia problem that happened when we picked a side. Then there is the fact in Afghanistan that those people don't even like each other. We could sink all the money and troops we want into this thing. It is not gonna stop four random people hatching up a terrorist plan in their basement. We can stop plans like that from happening, but it doesn't require an immense amount of money or troops. I consider that part the character of a man who uses logic.

 

I have a solution, bomb them into the Stone Age. That's where they want to live anyway. The beheading of women and children. Really?

 

It will not stop the lone wolf. Nothing will. It sure as heck will take care of the ISIS/ISIL army.

 

What you don't seem to understand is they don't want to negotiate. They want to kill all of the infidels (which you and I are).

 

Or we can just sit back and talk about how horrible all the killing of the innocents is and not call it what it is.

We should have sent our Sec. Of State over to give Sadaam and Osama big hugs.

 

We could have sent James Taylor over to sing for them. :ohbrother:

I have a solution, bomb them into the Stone Age. That's where they want to live anyway. The beheading of women and children. Really?

 

It will not stop the lone wolf. Nothing will. It sure as heck will take care of the ISIS/ISIL army.

 

What you don't seem to understand is they don't want to negotiate. They want to kill all of the infidels (which you and I are).

 

Or we can just sit back and talk about how horrible all the killing of the innocents is and not call it what it is.

 

Bomb them into the stone age? LOL because we haven't been doing that for the past decade. There are thousands of terrorist groups across the planet. We could literally wage war in every continent in the planet. It would fail miserably. Other countries are not going to allow the US to simply blow stuff up in their back yard. It's called logic. That is why there are chiefs of staff to advise the President not paranoid capt278. Once, we take care of ISIS, then there is Boko Horam and so on and so on. It is vital that other countries cooperate, because if they don't our efforts will fail. The US simply cannot afford to perform combat operations at the global scale many want it do.

Edited January 25, 201511 yr by jrfrank56

Bomb them into the stone age? LOL because we haven't been doing that for the past decade. There are thousands of terrorist groups across the planet. We could literally wage war in every continent in the planet. It would fail miserably. Other countries are not going to allow the US to simply blow stuff up in their back yard. It's called logic. That is why there are chiefs of staff to advise the President not paranoid capt278. Once, we take care of ISIS, then there is Boko Horam and so on and so on. It is vital that other countries cooperate, because if they don't our efforts will fail. The US simply cannot afford to perform combat operations at the global scale many want it do.

 

So I'm paranoid? I call it being a patriot.

 

It's a shame what some in this country have become. While those, like you, want to sit around the campfire, singing songs, innocents die. You have no solutions but want to criticize those that want to take action.

 

Again, you do not understand that these terrorists only understand and respect one thing, power.

 

Sleep well tonight, because to paraphrase Jack Nicholson, there are those on the wall guarding our freedom.

Iraq will go down as one of the greatest foreign policy blunders in the history of this country.

 

 

Sadaam killed almost a million of his own people prior to the war. How many hundreds of thousands more would have been killed in the last ten years if he was still in power? His own people tried and hanged him. Now, I spend a lot of time in Europe, and the war was unpopular in Germany and France because it went against their financial interests. I can tell you, as much as they like to think they are progressive...they are parochial to their own interests and it has never been in their vernacular to unilaterally put their behinds on the line to aid other countries. This may be harsh, but I was attacked many times by Germans who seemed to be more interested in our politics than their own. I get the sense that many of our liberals...maybe like yourself...spend more time buying into the propaganda on CNN, and worry about our popularity in Europe, rather than studying history and/or psychology to try to understand yourself how the world works.

 

Did we solve all the problems in Iraq or the middle east? Of course not. Did we stop the genocide against the Kurds by Sadaam?

So I'm paranoid? I call it being a patriot.

 

It's a shame what some in this country have become. While those, like you, want to sit around the campfire, singing songs, innocents die. You have no solutions but want to criticize those that want to take action.

 

Again, you do not understand that these terrorists only understand and respect one thing, power.

 

Sleep well tonight, because to paraphrase Jack Nicholson, there are those on the wall guarding our freedom.

 

It's called common sense. What we try to accomplish by invading those countries has failed. Spare me the Jack quote. People like you shouldn't assume. I served my country for 4 years, got out with an honorable discharge and did a tour of duty in Afghanistan as an Infantrymen in the Army. So your silly guilt trip is not going to work on me.

"Sadaam killed almost a million of his own people prior to the war. How many hundreds of thousands more would have been killed in the last ten years if he was still in power? His own people tried and hanged him. Now, I spend a lot of time in Europe, and the war was unpopular in Germany and France because it went against their financial interests. I can tell you, as much as they like to think they are progressive...they are parochial to their own interests and it has never been in their vernacular to unilaterally put their behinds on the line to aid other countries. This may be harsh, but I was attacked many times by Germans who seemed to be more interested in our politics than their own. I get the sense that many of our liberals...maybe like yourself...spend more time buying into the propaganda on CNN, and worry about our popularity in Europe, rather than studying history and/or psychology to try to understand yourself how the world works.

 

Did we solve all the problems in Iraq or the middle east? Of course not. Did we stop the genocide against the Kurds by Sadaam?"

 

The only person that hasn't studied history is you. We can not afford to continue what we do. You and capt278 keep thinking our best defense is an offense idea by invading these countries and it has FAILED. We got Bin Laden with 24 men. There was no need to have 100,000 there. Besides Sadaam wasn't a bad guy to us when we supported him in the iran-iraq war. We all know how that worked out.

I would argue the Nazi agenda was an ideology as were the axis parties intentions. We left support to allow stability and reconstruction of their society's. Abandoning Iraq in such a sensitive state was a mistake period. Saying going into Iraq was a mistake is a point I can respect. But at the Sametime you have to admit the exit strategy of Obama was a failure. It has directly led to the instability in the area.

 

We left support because we needed them as buffers against the Soviet Union.

:popcorn::popcorn: