125
A Democratic Administration's plan to fight The War On Terror : Swingers Discussion 826591041
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsA Democratic Administration's plan to fight The War On Terror
TOPIC: A Democratic Administration's plan to fight The War On Terror
GoTo Page: Less ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Start   41 to 50 of 117   End
User Details are only visible to members.
tbrm... I apologize for getting this rebuttal late. I get here sometimes too late. I read Destin's response to you and I think he/she is right. By your comments, you appear that you have no military background.

I take exception to your comments about leaving the troops in a no-win situation is betrayal. You went on the state failed insurgencies.

You should have gone on with: The Great War (aka World War I) - success World War II - success

These were wars that we, with the current philosophy of some of our elected legislators, would have stayed out or left before the final victory. If you track the historical movement of the US military during those two wars, you would know that this country also faced a no-win situation. However, there were few individuals like Hillary, Reid and you that no one listened to, thus guaranteeing an uncompromised victory.

Fairfield CA
Username hidden
(575 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Excuse me for stepping in on your discussion.

I personally have the expectation that when the President and Congress decide to commit troops, that the troops are given every chance for a successful outcome. And that committing troops is a last resort.

I'm sure I will catch flak for this one, but I kinda liken it to having car insurance. Just because I have good car insurance doesn't mean that I can smash into someone just because I get mad at them.

Saddam was a bastard, and I know of no reasonable person who would want him back in power, however he did keep a lid on the ethno-sectarian strife in a way that we have not been able to replicate.

Now I don't condone Saddam's methods either, but he was our bastard. We put him in power, or at least did not stand in his way. American companies sold him the precursors for his poison gas, so our hands are not especially clean in this matter.

We are left with no good alternatives. We could stay there another 10 years, at a cost of 1,000 brave American troops per year, 15,000 civilians and who knows how many insurgents. And maybe at the end have a stable society.

Or we could get out, remove the American losses, but increase the civilian losses to who knows what, but certainly more than now. Ethnic cleansing for who knows how many years. Eventually, I imagine we might have a stable society.

We could relocate the different groups and give them some autonomy. I suspect that that would cut down on the ethnic cleansing, but it would take a strongman type leader to herd that group of cats.

There are probably another two dozen possible solutions, all fraught with their own pros and cons.

What we need to do, IMHO, is get away from this false choice of either leaving our troops there or bringing them home. If we are interested in the peace, stability, and welfare of the people in the region, that is really only part of the equation.

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"All I can say then TBR is you have no argument then...since you do not understand war ...did you ever serve?///and the Dem's are too conservative...you are partiless and insignificant. There are 2 ways to think in this country today, left or right, I fought and bled so you could spout off but after this I do not have to justify or answer. Have a good night and know you and your family are safe because of men like me."

No I did not serve. I was born a bit too late for Vietnam and my late teens and 20's were a dark time for the military. I had children very young and chose a different path.

I may be partyless, however I do not feel I am insignificant. There are many things I believe in that I will not see in my lifetime. I suspect it is the same with you.

There are many ways to think in this country, unfortunately we only have two choices with any chance to be in power. I suspect there are many conservatives that do not agree with everything the current administration has done, just as I do not agree with much that the current Democratic party stands for. Still, the alternative to not working for what you believe in is always worse.

I honor and thank you for your service. My feelings about the military are complex and conflicted, however you did something necessary that I chose not to do, and that deserves my respect and gratitude.

In my opinion, we should all give thanks for each other. People like you, and people like me, are what makes this country great. We should all be thankful for the incredible riches that allow us to have the free time to communicate over thousands of miles. We should be thankful that we can have conversations, sometimes heated, like the exchange between Sen and I today, and neither of us has to worry about a knock on the door in the middle of the night. We should be thankful that, within reason, we can go where we want, do what we want, think what we want, and fuck who we want.

Anyway, this is getting to long, and I have been known to be a bit talkative. You have a good night.

Peace be with you

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
All I can say then TBR is you have no argument then...since you do not understand war ...did you ever serve?///and the Dem's are too conservative...you are partiless and insignificant. There are 2 ways to think in this country today, left or right, I fought and bled so you could spout off but after this I do not have to justify or answer. Have a good night and know you and your family are safe because of men like me.

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"I don't think so and I don't think you are a libe either. Just a good democrat that needs to take back your own party...good luck!"

My stock line for that comment is that the democrats are too conservative for me.

But like most people, I am not easy to pigeonhole. I am fairly conservative on a few issues, moderate on others, and very liberal (progressive? whatever the current PC term is) on others.

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
So your plan is to kill them to prevent them from being killed?

"We had to destroy the village to save it."

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Char a pull out, which is surrender called for the lib's will cause a blood bath in Iraq..is that what you want TBR? I don't think so and I don't think you are a libe either. Just a good democrat that needs to take back your own party...good luck!

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Really now.

I said I was puzzled by the venom.

I have not seen any liberal on this board advocate the murder of innocent Iraqi women and children, have seen it from conservatives.

I have not seen any liberal on this board advocate the murder of a Presidential candidate, have seen it from conservatives.

I have not seen the child of a sitting President derided because she was ugly, have seen that from conservatives.

There is a difference between opposing the President's plans and advocating harm upon innocent humans.

But I would not expect you to understand the difference.

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I look down my nose at no one. We all have valuable contributions to make.

I have called y'all crybabies, however, I have not called anyone traitor, advocated anyone be taken out and shot, or any of the other hateful things I have seen conservatives use on this board.

My simple point here is no one has a monopoly on competence or incompetence. We do the best we can with what we have.

Although I am constantly puzzled by the venom used when conservatives describe liberals.

We are all in this together. Neither one of us is going away. We should at least try to work together.

Cheers

Lakeside CA
Username hidden
(17354 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
There have been five major wars (not including the present one) we have been involved in since 1900.

WWI-ended on Democratic administration-won WWII-ended on Democratic administration-won Korea-ended on Republican administration-draw Vietnam-ended on Republican administration-lost Gulf War I-Ended on Republican administration-won

Democrats are 2-0. Republicans are 1-1-1. --------------------------------------------------------- The above is just plain stupid and simplistic.

Korea and Vietnam were started and fought under the direction of Democrat Administrations. Korea, under Truman, was a noble and righteous effort. It was ended due to public opinion that had turned against the administration. I believe Truman was correct, at the time he did the right thing. Eisenhower inherited a public perception nightmare and also did the right thing.

Vietnam was a war started and primarily fought under two Democrat Administrations. Again public perception turned against them and Nixon ran on the promise he would end the war and once elected did same.

America and it's members of the Armed Forces have never lost a war! Politicians (on all sides of the political spectrum) and members of our media are responsible for any perception of losing.

As far a WWII, today some Democrats, primarily the liberals would be appalled at how FDR managed that war. Since it was a War that the German’s could easily have been the victors, if that war was fought today, we would lose. FDR controlled media access and he made no bones about what treason and sedition was and that the media was not exempt from it. Also back then, Congress understood they only funded the war, but stayed out of the strategic side which belongs to the executive branch. Today we have everyone trying to play Quarterback. FDR did not stand for that, as well as Truman, and understood the need to display solidarity not only in the face of the enemy, but to our troops who were reading newspapers. Their morale was more important then anyone’s political ideology.

Minden NV
Username hidden
(4041 posts)
GoTo Page: Less ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Start   41 to 50 of 117   End
TOPIC: A Democratic Administration's plan to fight The War On Terror