Posted on 07/11/2004 10:48:58 AM PDT by Military Chick
Joe, actually my bottom line is right.
Saddam had bunkers and in any case we didnt know if and *where* to bomb. Those two terror camps I mentioned? One was salman pak. The other one - WE DISCOVERED ONLY AFTER WE INVADED IRAQ. It's trivial. We bomb one camp, they move it somewhere else and camaflauge it.
If bombing terror camps was enough to stop terrorism, we never would have had 9/11 (since we bombed bin laden in 1998 dontcha know).
Not following you. The post was in response to a comment about republicans controling the senate. If your can't get cooperation from one of your own senators (regardless of his reasons for voting the way he does or making the alliances he does) isn't control. That's what my counterpoint was intended to convey.
I suppose it took posts to get me off my behind and see what can be done to access my original login. Back in 1998 to be exact. I have only used to other handles, and would use second but for security reasons I decided on a catchy handle.
I think that folks should show a little more respect to a persons post then their time in FR. I appreciate my husband standing up for me but in the end some minds are made up and will never see anything else. No matter how truthful it is.
So I am a former AF meteorologist, daughter of a West Pointer and the proud wife of an Army Artillery Officer, who has fought for our freedoms. 'nuf said
But you haven't stated it on your own page, have you?
I always thought you were a resident of Denmark.
Then how do you explain the missiles that hit Kuwait? Or the ones we found after the invasion? Air Power is not the be-all end-all. Even the USAF is begining to realize that since Operation Allied Force (Balkans) and the hunt for UBL. You have to identify targets before you can bomb them. That's pretty tough to do in many circumstances for instance when you're after terrorists intermingled with the populace.
We currently reside near Ft. Leavenworth, KS where my husband is stationed. Why do you ask?
Oops was thinking something else as I typed. Sorry, I am a former AF metrologist.
"Using your logic, I guess we should have fought a more politically correct, humane war with Japan and Germany."
Um, we ended up with boots on the ground in both countries at the end of WWII. Nobody on FR is against air power when useful; we all think the 1991 (Iraq), 2001 (Afghanistan) and 2003 (Iraq) air campaigns were awesome, and I'm on your side in appreciating the utility of bombing fallujah 'safe houses' (not safe now, he he he).
But we have yet to win a single war with air power alone.
And the Clinton "fire a missile and forget" policy left us with major negatives consequences.
Afghanistan 2001 was perhaps the ideal example of how future wars could be won: Major air component; use of special forces and intel on the ground; allies, and a 'few good men' to spearhead victory. But in the end, we dont take and hold air, we take and hold GROUND, so we need Boots on the Ground to do it.
He said that the Iraq war is "a war which will undoubtedly widen, perhaps even into world war,"
...since he has been PROVEN WRONG BY EVENTS will he come back to the fold?
hmmmm.
Good find!
I always thought you were a resident of Denmark
Hey, I don't want to use up FR bandwidth with what I think is superflorous stuff, tar and feather me.
Sounds like a bunch of RINO RATS to me.
Kuwait? Big deal. The ones after the invasion? Pfsst. Come on. Even if you empty out a bag of sand, there will still be some grains left in the bottom.
Speaking of RINOs it seems that if given the choice of a democrat or a RINO they will vote for the RINO.
I am not sure how much traction these folks will get, if the previous article/NY advertisement where top military leaders (retired) and former ambassadors came out against Bush and the war. It stopped the day it was published. I am betting in the end this will be old news.
You got a choice, Inaction with the Democrats or Action with George W BUSH.
Afganistan and Iraq are successes, inspite of what the media and Liberals try and paint it as.
Hey, tar and feather yourself, I have more important things to do.
Your shopping list of Important things, in a perfect world yeah we are concerned about it, but right now WE'RE busy with other stuff - like Keeping the Airplane from Crashing. Your list will take several more elections and Presidents to clean up.
1. Illegal immigration
2. The continuation of Abortion without end in site
3. A runaway court that he does nothing about
4. Foot dragging on gay marriage
5. The world court
I am certainly voting for Bush/Cheney and all the other GOP candidates. I am also proud of all the military and former military men and women who have replied to Free Republic. Keep up the good work and make your country, family and President proud.
"Why do you ask?"
I guess I asked, because it seemed from your posts that you were more trusting of Bush detractors, than of the Commander-in-Chief himself. I for one just happen to believe that G.W. Bush is the real deal. Says what he means-means what he says. I just don't believe he would lie.
I do not believe that anyone else, vieing for Bush's job, has the guts to see this war on terrorism through to victory, and anything less than victory is absolute defeat.
"Regardless of Spector's vote history his seat guarantees the GOP majority, which means Tom Daschle isn't in control of our government."
If our majority in the Senate depends on RINOs next year, they'll perform as awfully as they have this term.
Hopefully, that wont be the case, and we will have a few more conservative senators replacing the likes of Edwards, Hollings, whoever that Floriduh senator is, etc.
It's time to give support to a third, right-of-center party. The Constitution Party, I suggest, may be the correct choice.
The objective? Elect congresspeople, but not jeopardize a Republican presidential win in 2008.
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.