Historically speaking we were never in Afghanistan, were were just arming them.
“Historically speaking we were never in Afghanistan, were were just arming them.”
Sure, right :-)) Actually, we’ve erred in Afghanistan twice, now that I think of it. First we built up Bin Laden with both arms AND manpower supplied to defeat the Russians, and then after 9/11, we went in like gangbusters there, then prematurely slacked off, causing the resurgence of Al Queda both there and beyond.
And here’s what most people (including the two Dem. candidates for SURE) don’t get about Iran. This is an unconventional threat where our doing nothing until AFTER they’re nuclearly established will be far too late. (To wit, HRC’s ludicrous statement that “if they nuclearly attack any of our allies, we would annihilate them”) Like they care??? They have publicly stated their intentions of destruction, in turn prompting, expecting and welcoming retaliation from us. This is a threat of such evil and magnitude that ONLY pre-emptive measures (no, I’m not talking nuking at this point) can stop it and prevent the immediate loss of millions (millions, not thousands) of lives as well as the secondary, long-term loss of more over the planet.
ALL peace-loving countries should grow some cajones and stand together on this, but in the absence of that, the little David of Israel understands and prepares to do what’s necessary against its Goliath, which would likely end in disaster due to sheer numbers and force disparities. We made a HUGE mistake in not addressing the Iranian threat first and foremost long ago, but we still have a small window of time left before the point of no return, of their being fully armed, eager and ready to launch.
For our next President not to understand this and commit accordingly is to assure chain-reaction devastation, the likes of which cannot be fully imagined.