Off-Topic: Not exactly my point...
(Lake Lanier Specific)
149 messages
Updated 2/24/2023 6:27:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
84,041 messages
Updated 10/17/2024 9:59:44 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,204 messages
Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM
(Lake Lanier Specific)
3 messages
Updated 7/28/2021 3:19:01 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,172 messages
Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
copperline
-
|
Subject:
|
Not exactly my point...
|
Date:
|
1/6/2012 12:26:13 AM
|
|
I think you can make the same national security arguments regarding multiple targets..... You might argue we need to be aggressive against Pakistan, occupy Afganistan as a colony, keep Iraq under American occupation for a decade more because we need bases from which we can fight Iran. I don't think we invaded Iraq to look for weapons of mass destruction, but we were told that this rationale was truthful and invasion critical to protection of US interests. Of course, there were no WMD's. Now, our economy is weak.... funding wars is very expensive.... and yet Obama's decision to follow thru on (Bush's) commitments to end the war seems to be earning him great criticism. Don't mistake Iraqi's in 2012 for French in WWII who saw the US military as liberators. History does not favor empires lasting forever, but do note the longevity of those whose vision led them to avoid policies of militaristic over-reach. Conservatives want a smaller government that spends less national treasure, so I don't understand their double-think of charging into wars without exit strategies... with rationales cobbled together out of misinformation or outright deception. This war had to end, but it was never going to end neatly or according to our dictates.....because we changed the balance of power in a highly fractured region of the world. Now, for better or worse, we will have to live with what we have done.
|
|