TexasTiger 12,961 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. WHAT? Are you blaming Bush STILL?bwahahahaha Did the decision to invade Iraq magically become someone else's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cptau 169 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Just about any other president would be at a minimum heavily arming the friendly countries in the Middle East to defeat the idiot ISIS islamic terrorists. That includes Jordan and the Kurds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I don't like hearing the argument used that the military is wearing thin or it lacks funding. We have several 100s of bases in several countries. Another reason i don't like to hear the lack of funding or stretched thin argument is that for years the government has been planning to expand overseas in the country of Australia. So we lack military might and funds, but at the same time we are continuing to expand? We have fought (and still fighting) in Iraq and Afghanistan. What is the end game? Is our military supposed to ever fully leave? Are we going to have permanent bases? Are we ever going to be allowed to reduce funding just solely based on ending an occupation? It doesn't certainly come off this way. Can we reduce our military presence without being wrongly demagogued as an Isolationist? There doesn't seem to be a strong enough push to overcome the loud talk of we're going to be attacked if we cut one dollar from the industrial military complex. There is a lot of waste in the military budget. Yet, even our economic growth is dependent on military spending. And to me that is a sign that this country is too far away from it's priorities. Our country's priorities would be another dissussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cptau 169 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 The stats on this site appear to be accurate so they are are good for comparison purposes. The accuracy of their ranking method is unknown. http://www.globalfirepower.com/ http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=United-States-of-America Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. That was most humorous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 alex...re. your post #24 above.......which Muslim countries have no terrorist ties that we would even consider attacking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. And I hope you will understand that I respect your opinion and will not call you dumb. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. And I hope you will understand that I respect your opinion and will not call you dumb. Thanks! I know, I know. There is just no substance. Seriously, I'm not trying to pick a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. And I hope you will understand that I respect your opinion and will not call you dumb. Thanks! I know, I know. There is just no substance. Seriously, I'm not trying to pick a fight. No problem. My opinion and .75 cents will buy you a Coke. We all have that in common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. :rimshot:/> That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Darn facts. Just get in the way :-). Thanks for your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. And I hope you will understand that I respect your opinion and will not call you dumb. Thanks! I know, I know. There is just no substance. Seriously, I'm not trying to pick a fight. No problem. My opinion and .75 cents will buy you a Coke. We all have that in common. You know where to buy Cokes for .75! I paid 1.68 for a water yesterday! 1.68. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Of course the Democrats were culpable for believing the administration. But surely you aren't trying to imply the Iraq war was a Democratic initiative? And chemical weapons don't create "mushroom clouds". To claim the WMD's were actually there is blatantly disingenuous. We didn't invade over old stocks of chemical weapons and everyone knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigeremt 6,652 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. :rimshot:/> That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Of course the Democrats were culpable for believing the administration. But surely you aren't trying to imply the Iraq war was a Democratic initiative? And chemical weapons don't create "mushroom clouds". To claim the WMD's were actually there is blatantly disingenuous. We didn't invade over old stocks of chemical weapons and everyone knows it. Dead horse beaten to death......again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. :rimshot:/> That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Of course the Democrats were culpable for believing the administration. But surely you aren't trying to imply the Iraq war was a Democratic initiative? And chemical weapons don't create "mushroom clouds". To claim the WMD's were actually there is blatantly disingenuous. We didn't invade over old stocks of chemical weapons and everyone knows it. Dead horse beaten to death......again. Yep. Unless we repeat it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. :rimshot:/> That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. Of course the Democrats were culpable for believing the administration. But surely you aren't trying to imply the Iraq war was a Democratic initiative? And chemical weapons don't create "mushroom clouds". To claim the WMD's were actually there is blatantly disingenuous. We didn't invade over old stocks of chemical weapons and everyone knows it. Dead horse beaten to death......again. I agree. It baffles me why posters keep bringing that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 alex...re. your post #24 above.......which Muslim countries have no terrorist ties that we would even consider attacking? Iraq was probably the least of all as far as a terror threat in the mid east when we invaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarTim 3,456 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... I hope you will accept this as well intended, constructive criticism. When you post stuff like this, it makes you look dumb. And I hope you will understand that I respect your opinion and will not call you dumb. Thanks! I know, I know. There is just no substance. Seriously, I'm not trying to pick a fight. No problem. My opinion and .75 cents will buy you a Coke. We all have that in common. You know where to buy Cokes for .75! I paid 1.68 for a water yesterday! 1.68. Haha. Touche'!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeBags7277 734 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 What our Forces lack most of all is leadership. No CIC. What would a "conservative" President be doing differently? Different than barry? Basically Everything... needlessly attacking Muslim countries with no terror ties or WMD stockpiles. That was most humorous! What I always find amusing is how certain people absolutely cling to the Iraq War as if it is some kind of unforgivable condemnation of conservative foreign policy decisions. Through it all, they eagerly discount the fact that the Iraq War effort was publicly debated for over a year in Congress and that war didn't start for another 6 months after gaining Congressional approval. They also seem content to blame republican lies for being the reason for invading Iraq but the pesky fact is Bill Clinton was in office when that line of thought emerged as a likely policy matter of necessity. Add to that that John Kerry, Hillary Clinton. Harry Reid all voted FOR the war as did most of the democrat leadership. It wasn't until Bush sought re-election that they chose to politicize that decision with stupid comments like they were "against it before they were for it" That war was supported by a UN Resolution, Congressional approval, over 50 allies and the real interesting thing they refuse to acknowledge is that stockpiles WMDs WERE FOUND as SHussein had been using them against his own people for years. So, both parties are far too eager to go to war, and in all cases, the opposition party will play politics over it. The worthy goal of establishing a truly pro-peace major party is a huge undertaking. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeBags7277 734 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I don't like hearing the argument used that the military is wearing thin or it lacks funding. We have several 100s of bases in several countries. Another reason i don't like to hear the lack of funding or stretched thin argument is that for years the government has been planning to expand overseas in the country of Australia. So we lack military might and funds, but at the same time we are continuing to expand? We have fought (and still fighting) in Iraq and Afghanistan. What is the end game? Is our military supposed to ever fully leave? Are we going to have permanent bases? Are we ever going to be allowed to reduce funding just solely based on ending an occupation? It doesn't certainly come off this way. Can we reduce our military presence without being wrongly demagogued as an Isolationist? There doesn't seem to be a strong enough push to overcome the loud talk of we're going to be attacked if we cut one dollar from the industrial military complex. There is a lot of waste in the military budget. Yet, even our economic growth is dependent on military spending. And to me that is a sign that this country is too far away from it's priorities. Our country's priorities would be another dissussion. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Well, there's this... U.S. flags at military bases must be 100% American-made http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/22/american-made-flags-military/5725165/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 With regards to Iraq and Afghanistan, whether or not we should have went in is a point that we can debate for years and never come to a conclusion that everyone will agree on. Now it is relevant in terms of what areas in the future we may want to get involved in. We are there and as such we cannot just walk away and leave it in worse shape than before. Things like that require a long term commitment to ensure that the country can be viable. I know nation building is something we want to stay away from and I agree with that sentiment. We don't have to give them a democracy like ours but we have to leave a government that is responsible to the people and strong enough to defend itself against groups like ISIS and the Taliban. Get them to a place where Jordan is or even Egypt. There is always waste that can be dealt with and gotten rid of in the military as in all areas of government. Can we close some bases worldwide? Probably so, but at the same time the United States is in a unique position as the lone superpower in the world. We cannot pull back within our own borders and just sit there unless a threat to us here materializes. I'm not accusing anyone of being isolationist but still we must remain engaged with the world. We can't just allow the Chinese and the Russians just to name two to just have free reign unless they come straight at us. Finding the right balance is the key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I agree now ct. We are in it regardless of whether or not we should have been. I classify Iraq and Afghanistan totally different. We had to handle Afghanistan. Should have been more focused on it and should still be there. Iraq was never going to be a friend but at least was a civilization that could protect itself from the likes of isis. The supposed threat from Iraq cpuld have been handled by diplomacy and help and pressure from the international community. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but i don't know any honest,reasonable person that thinks Iraq was worth the cost and further responsibility we have taken on. I don't know if the intel on Iraq was an honest mistake or intentional lies. I am confident it also caused more extremism than we already faced. Most conservatives can't admit that for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I agree now ct. We are in it regardless of whether or not we should have been. I classify Iraq and Afghanistan totally different. We had to handle Afghanistan. Should have been more focused on it and should still be there. Iraq was never going to be a friend but at least was a civilization that could protect itself from the likes of isis. The supposed threat from Iraq cpuld have been handled by diplomacy and help and pressure from the international community. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but i don't know any honest,reasonable person that thinks Iraq was worth the cost and further responsibility we have taken on. I don't know if the intel on Iraq was an honest mistake or intentional lies. I am confident it also caused more extremism than we already faced. Most conservatives can't admit that for some reason. I understand your point Alex but it didn't cause it. Leaving a vacuum after Saddam was deposed allowed these people to move in and give them a place to operate. The extremism and fanaticism was always there. It would have manifested itself in a different way. I personally think that the WMD did exist and that the activity along the Syrian border that took place while we were playing footsie with the UN was him moving his materiel over there. Once he was gone then Syria just hung on to it. I don't have any way to prove that but that's my opinion on the matter. Whether I'm right or wrong on that is irrelevant. We are there and we have to see it through. We actually had things under control after the surge. We got the bright idea that we could just walk away and also made the mistake of backing Maliki who just made matters worse. Now we've got a bigger mess to clean up. Let's get in there and clean it up and then let's make sure they have a stable government that is willing and able to defend itself and it's citizens. Maybe it needs to be divided up as Biden suggested. I think he's goofy most of the time but on this one it appears he had it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.