Posted on 09/19/2014 5:24:10 AM PDT by lifeofgrace
Arabs make lousy mercenaries. Always have.
America is NOW in the ‘client war’ business... and holding our own.
“O” is striving to make America the premier paymaster in this industry!
Thanks “O”!!
“It appears cowardly, and even immoral to pay others to fight for you.”
Congress wouldn’t be fighting were it to declare war, so they’d be paying people to fight for them anyway. Their only alternative would be to reinstate the draft, in which case soldiers would fight not for money but to avoid hard labor and ignominy. Besides, it’s misleading to say they’re fighting for us. They fighting for Syrians and Iraqis, or something, and Kurds and, as usual, Israelis, but only very indirectly for us.
By the way, “appears”? Is it or isn’t it? Is this yet another commentary on the shadow play that is politics, or is this writer of the “well, if you ask me,” “just my humble opinion, but” “seems to me,” “I feel,” “kinda-sorta,” “almost,” “as if,” “like, you know whatever,” school?
The Roman Empire was once the most powerful in the whole world, then they became fat, lazy and stupid, They paid others to fight for them. How did that work out?
I told hubby last night....if he didn’t want our boots on the ground instead of spending a year or 2 or 3 etc. training others to fight for us they should have just hired a bunch of mercenaries. Would’ve been a lot faster and probably cheaper.
No, this is not our fight.
We did not go into Syria and it is falling apart.
We did not go into Egypt and it is falling apart.
Ditto other parts of the ME
And even if we did screw up things in Iraq, two wrongs do not make a right.
Saddaam Hussein was not going to live forever and as soon as he was gone (either died of natural causes or someone took him out) civil wars was enevitble in Iraq.
Same think in Libya
Same thing in Syria
Same thing in Saudi Arabia
Do you think all these places would have been or will be peaceful one iron-fisted dictators are gone?
>>What if the newly armed ‘rebels’ turn and use their weapons against Assad instead of ISIS? <<
That’s exactly what Obama is hoping for.
Americans have little appetite for anymore GWB/McCain/Grahamnesty massive ground wars in these poor Islamic crap holes, and rightly so,
I think he made a strange point there. Nothing immoral, IMHO, about paying others to fight. Or at least financing others to fight. For example it would have made sense to arm the Northern Alliance to marginalize the Taliban. It is their country and they know it better and the enemy better than we do.
In this case, the problem is it is unclear who is a true moderate, if any exist at all in the rebel camp in Syria. As far as I’m concerned minorities such as Christians are better under Assad than any of the rebels.
Thanks, Grae!
I thought the Rats didn’t like “Outsourcing.”.....
‘Arabs are bad enemies and worse allies’. Napoleon I
Worked for King George III, what could go wrong?
Yesterday, the Senate approved a bill to arm and train Syrian rebels, who fight against Bashar Assad, so they can eliminate ISIS, which possesses hundreds of millions of dollars, and no shortage of fighters willing to die for them... Even libertarian-leaning (read: isolationist) Rand Paul voted for this measure.“I’m not sending your son, your daughter, over to the middle of that chaos,” said Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, whose libertarian views have propelled him into contention for his party’s 2016 nomination. “The people who live there need to stand up and fight.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.