Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ol' Dan Tucker; HankReardon
At what point do you say we've been there long enough?

At the point where remaining there is no longer is America's best interest. For the foreseeable future, the US needs a middle-east presence. Winning the war will result in the majority of our combat forces being removed, but some numbers will and arguably should remain for as long as the mid-east is a strategic concern for the USA.

10 posted on 12/15/2005 11:21:15 AM PST by Don Carlos (Democrats: Home-grown surrender monkeys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Don Carlos
At the point where remaining there is no longer is America's best interest. For the foreseeable future, the US needs a middle-east presence. Winning the war will result in the majority of our combat forces being removed, but some numbers will and arguably should remain for as long as the mid-east is a strategic concern for the USA.

We already created a presence when we invaded Afghanistan. Didn't need to go into Iraq, except to kick Saddam out of office and take over his oil fields (and banks).

As I've been intimating, there never will be a 'victory' in Iraq. It's all an illusion.

Invading Iraq had nothing to do with the 'War on Terrorism' and everything to do with securing a middle-east source of oil. You said so yourself.

Now, if only Bush were as honest as you.

11 posted on 12/15/2005 12:05:30 PM PST by Ol' Dan Tucker (Karen Ryan reporting...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson