Posted on 06/07/2015 9:24:41 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says he wouldn’t rule out a full-blown re-invasion of Iraq if he were to become the next commander-in-chief.
The likely Republican presidential candidate and early frontrunner in several polls said he would consider a re-invasion if it were deemed necessary to protect American national security at home and abroad.
"It would not be limited to anything out there," Walker told ABC's Jonathan Karl in an exclusive interview with for “This Week.” "Once we start saying how far we're willing to go or how many troops we're willing to invest, we send a horrible message, particularly to foes in the Middle East who are willing to wait us out."
Walker has been critical of President Obama’s handling of Iraq and Syria for its limited scope but also qualified that he does not believe in “open-ended, limitless engagements.” Though he has been sparse in offering specific changes to U.S. policy in the fight against ISIS, the likely presidential candidate said he has been deepening his understanding of international affairs in recent months....
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
"Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Wouldn't Rule Out That He Will Stop Beating His Wife"
Doesn't that send a horrible message, particularly to foes in the Middle East, that all they have to do is wait us out?
Doesn't that send a horrible message, particularly to foes in the Middle East, that all they have to do is wait us out?
Someone is actually TALKING like a leader.
At this point I see only TWO Conservatives on the stage.
Cruz and Walker.
Really? I think we have poured out enough blood over their. Lives, limbs.. enough. No one is willing to finish the job, it will be a repeat of what we have just seen, twice. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me a third time and I deserve it. No more US troops in the ME, not one. Let the UN figure it out.
Post #9 well said
That's right, I said it.
Iraq must be cleansed of Arabs and the small contingent of Persians that reside there.
Give the whole magilicutty to the Kurds in exchange for exclusive mineral rights.
Oh yeah, we have to be willing to kill 200,000 as we drive them to Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Syria etc.
But in the long run, everyone will be better off.
Why is it we can't find leaders that think in grand, geopolitical terms?
Roosevelt (piss be upon him), Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, Johnson, Nixon...even CARTER with the "Carter Doctrine" understood the grave matters of state.
Bush II half-assed it. He should have started with Iran, but since we won Iraq we should take possession.
Machiavelli spits on them and pisses on their shoes.
It's not a question of ambitions, but one of CAPABILITY.
And in that the two are light years apart.
And Cruz is iffy, at best.
I’m more of a Cruz fan than a Walker fan, but we well just have to send the boys back to clean up Hillary’s mess in the Middle East. I’ll support it, as long as our soldiers are given the freedom to do what is needed to win.
Actually I thought I was praising him for not pandering to the isolationist bunch. We simply don’t know what will be needed in Iraq and elsewhere in that part of the world and it would be stupid to commit either way.
Any serious candidate for the Presidency should have grasped the reality, Iraq is not even Iraq any more. It is essentially, Kurdistan in the north, ISIS in the Anbar province and a puppet government of Iran in the east.
Only the Kurds would be even remotely interested in forming any sort of alliance with the US.
Anything else is an exercise in futility.
I was posting to the last post on the thread.
I neglected to add “all.”
And you unequivocally KNOW this HOW?
Islamic State needs to be a new country (under new management, of course). Divide what’s now Iraq into Kurdistan and Babylonia. Then create an independent state for the Alawites in Latakia.
1. Supports TPA/TPP and the associated secrecy
2. Supports increased legal immigration with 93 million citizen out of the workforce
3. Supports the legalization of those here illegally now
4. While he postured well with the short filibuster, he voted 4 times to fund Obamacare
Perhaps that's how you define a conservative?
Not me. He's just as much of a scumbag as the rest of them.
Perhaps worse because of his systematic obfuscations (immigration...TPA...Obamacare etc.)
Dude. Wake up.
"Dude.. go flip your minnow."
Now, I'm EMPHATICALLY for Ted Cruz.
I totally disagree with you. The Nazis and ISIS’ goals are the same, only the tactics are different. You are now seeing SOME OF THEM ‘flee’ from Libya into ITALY. And how many local terrorist groups throughout the world have announced their alliance with ISIS, such as Boko Haram? A Nazi wore a uniform, ISIS doesn’t. Same goal, different methodology. Just as much a threat, IMO.
While I agree with you on the goals and methods of ISIS vs Nazi's, they are worlds apart in relative capability.
Nazi had a reasonable probability of taking over the entire world.
ISIS is a large street gang with no manufacturing, R&D etc. None would survive a day against a modern military assault.
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.