After Baghdad Where Do We Go? (Asks Buchanan)

http://www.theamericancause.org | 3-3-3 | Pat Buchanan

[pickemuphere]

The military mission is to DISARM the Iraqi military. Pure, simple, straightforward, clear. The exit strategy is just that: disarm the military, then leave.

Just as we've done in Afghanistan, right? We will be in Iraq for at least a decade, perhaps longer--witness Japan and Germany.

[Enemy Of The State]

First Baghdad, then Pyonyang, then on to Beijing and back around at Paris?

[uncbob]

Just as we've done in Afghanistan, right? We will be in Iraq for at least a decade, perhaps longer--witness Japan and Germany.

That is the main problem
Once Tito was gone look what happened in Yugoslavia

Once Saddam is gone how are we gonna keep the rest of the Iraq factions in line with assurances they will stay peaceful when we leave
Bush is taking on a hell of a task
But he is a Texan

[ALOHA RONNIE]

NEVER FORGET

BUSH Doctrine =

Bringing DEMOCRACY to the Common Man everywhere is best for EVERYONE.

NEVER FORGET

[jo6pac]

But he is a Texan

So was LBJ.

[Thane_Banquo]

How can one criticize the war against the Nazis and not be a Nazi-sympathizer?

[Lucky Lyn]

I can tell ya one thing about Pat and that was he was against nafta and that is a plus, just try to find anything that isn't made in China! Where do you think all this
money that we are spending for Chinese products are going
for,hmmmmmmmmmm?

[SoulStorms]

"Whatever it is we do will most likely benefit Israel too, which means that Buchanan will be against it..."

Exactly! Everytime I hear Pat in an interview, he seems measured and even dispassionate until he (inevitably) begins a rant against Israel. Then it is easy to see where his heart lies.

I used to find some of his views inscrutable and opaque until I started asking myself "how will this hurt Israel?". Suddenly, his views became transparent.

[xzins]

The United States intends to invade and occupy a nation that has not attacked us, to reshape its society, rebuild its government, and redirect its foreign policy to reflect American ideals and serve American interests.

Buchanen is wrong. Iraq is part and parcel of those who have attacked us.

He wants millions dead of smallpox before he'll agree that Iraq is a threat. No, that's not quite right.

He wants millions dead AND he wants Iraq to leave a note lying on their dead corpses saying, "Iraq claims responsibility for this. Signed, Saddam."

[habaes corpussel]

"What is the exit strat-er-gee?"

We will ex-fil out starting in 2014.If we don't get kicked out...

[bob808]

How can one criticize the war against the Nazis and not be a Nazi-sympathizer?

First of all, I believe the point of his book A Republic, not an Empire was to illustrate his concern about the consequences of interventionism and that the U.S. has been gradually moving away from functioning as a constitutional republic and has been surrendering too much power to the executive and judicial branches of government, thereby destroying the checks and balances as envisioned by the founding fathers.

From what I recall, he uses WW2 as an example of an overzealous president(FDR), who campaigned and got elected on a platform of staying out of any European war, but upon taking office he began secretly aiding Churchill hoping to provoke an incident with the Germans to use as justification to drag the US into the war.

So you see, the point of his criticism was not to defend the Nazis. He was criticizing an executive for not following through on the position he got elected on and for actively working against the (at that time) non-interventionist wishes of the American people.

He also mentions that Germany was interested in getting its Lebensraum by expanding eastward and conquering the Soviet Union, not by going to war with the West. (Remember that it was Britain & France who declared on Germany after Hitler invaded Poland). So, while he says Nazism was rightfully defeated, one of the unintended consequences was that we actually saved communism. Then he goes on to tally up the dead from Stalin's purges, the Chinese revolution, Korea, Vietnam, etc and points out the enormous costs in lives and fortune spent during the Cold War.

Of course, once the mainstream medica locked there teeth onto this, it was a never ending stream of "Nazi sympathizer".

[habaes corpussel]

"Buchanen is wrong. Iraq is part and parcel of those who have attacked us."

Iran is the bigger threat and we are not doing much to them.....

[Radioactive]

It was Pat Butram---not Pat Buchanon that played Mr Haney.

I wish Arnold M. Ziffle would not have been made into ham & sausage though. Most people don't know this but Arnold Ziffle's middle name was Muhammed.

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

we go east

[ex-snook]

"Of course, once the mainstream medica locked there teeth onto this, it was a never ending stream of "Nazi sympathizer". "

You are wasting your time in posting truth to the Goebbel's crowd. If they read the book, they would have found that Pat was quoting Kissinger's book on Truman who said we should support the Germans if Russia was winning and the Russians if the Germans were winning. (P277 for those interested in the truth). Now Truman was hardly a 'Nazi sympathizer'. It is much more Goebbel's like to smear Pat.

Their main problem is that they are not for America first and will smear accordingly.

[bob808]

I think you hit the nail right on the head, snook.

[jeremiah]

He didn't criticize the war against the Nazis, he simply put out the thesis, that if we would have kept our noses out of the first world war, they would have quit fighting eventually. France and Britain could not have humbled Germany to the extent they did, Germany would not have hit rock bottom, and come out with the severe attitude, and Hitler would have been a fringe player. The peace forced upon Germany after WW I, was extremely harsh, and the French especially, caused WW II, by acting like they had the whip hand, when all they had was US on their side.

[gabby hayes]

We are powerful, and we are virtuous. But the two are not continuously synonomous. Too many are confusing our power with virtue and corresponding missionary obligations. A staunch conservative and military vet, I tend to agree with Pat on this one. It may not be popular on this forum, but Thoreau's statement, "We are men first and subjects afterwards" rings with anti-statism and the call of conscience. I want to support the President on Iraq, but the AQ linkage has not been made in my mind, and I will not summarily bash those who dissent.

[WOSG]

Man, I love Buchanan. Why Bush don't consider him for a post, such as foreign-policy advisor, is beyond me."


ROFLMAO ... doing his best to dig into Israel?!? Calling Bush the "War Party" for its vigor in the War on terror? Ther "Sharon" plan is nothing but a fantasy he concocted ... YOu have to get as far left as Cynthia McKinney to get more looney.

Pat B. alas has a severe blind spot for *anything* that remotely helps Israel.

I say make him ambassador to Israel and insist he doesnt come back until there is peace in the middle east.

The Jews and Arabs will cement a deal pronto just to get him out of there. :-)

[xzins]

War are fought in campaigns.

We had the Afghan campaign.
Next we have the Iraq campaign.
Next we have.....Omigosh, after the Iraq campaign we have borders on either side of Iran that are controlled by....US.