Posted on 07/03/2008 9:40:20 AM PDT by mondoreb
You sound like an anti-war Democrat. The U.S. Military does not bomb indiscriminately and "millions" of Iraqis would likely not have been killled. I really don't care about "support" abroad as it is usually worthless as witnessed by the extremely shallow and tepid support for our "limited" war. The American people would have been just fine with a military campaign that focused more on killing the enemy and destroying his capabilities with little loss of American life than our "compassionate" campaign that has cost us so much. I think the Congress would have gone along with such a solution too.
“You sound like an anti-war Democrat.”
When I called Barr an anti-war kook, you replied that ‘Any sane person is anti-war.’
“The U.S. Military does not bomb indiscriminately”
Exactly, and this is why your plan is pure fantasy.
” and “millions” of Iraqis would likely not have been killed.”
You had claimed that your plan would have caused ‘Lots of civilian casualties.’ Without intel gathered from ground troops, how would you successfully take out Saddam and other terrorists in Iraq, without knowing their location?
“I really don’t care about “support” abroad as it is usually worthless as witnessed by the extremely shallow and tepid support for our “limited” war.”
You’re attempt to trivialize the sacrifices made by our allies as ‘worthless’ is pretty silly.
“The American people would have been just fine with a military campaign that focused more on killing the enemy and destroying his capabilities with little loss of American life than our “compassionate” campaign that has cost us so much. “
Operation Iraqi Freedom did focus on killing the enemy and destroying his capabilities, along with ensuring that he doesn’t return. Since we’ve freed millions from Saddam/al-qaeda/Iranian tyranny, why do you put the word ‘compassionate’ in quotes? Don’t you believe that such actions show compassion on our part?
Iraqis are victims of the tyranny of the Muslim "religion" which they have not been "freed" from. No, I do not think that the cost of the post Saddam efforts in Iraq are worth it nor do I believe it shows "compassion" to those our "leaders" are supposed to be primarily concerned with, U.S. citizens.
Politicians, like McCain, who think it appropriate to spend the most sacred of our secular holidays, the Fourth of July, groveling in a foreign country that is in the process of basically invading the U.S. is another prime example of our "leaders" not understanding who they represent and who they are supposed to be concerned about.
Any politician who does not put America not only first but far above any other consideration, including the welfare of citizens of foreign countries, does not deserve the support of any American.
You had claimed that your plan would have caused ‘Lots of civilian casualties.’ Without intel gathered from ground troops, how would you successfully take out Saddam and other terrorists in Iraq, without knowing their location? Also, how would your plan ensure that Iraq is not taken over by either al-qaeda or Iran, both of which present a threat to the security of the U.S. Both terrorist factions have essentially been detroyed by coalition and Iraqi forces. Without ground troops gathering intel, how would you destroy these factions?
“Any politician who does not put America not only first but far above any other consideration, including the welfare of citizens of foreign countries”
A democratic Iraq poses no threat to us, and in fact is a great ally in the WOT. Iraq being a democratic ally runs counter to the ambitions of our mutual enemies (like al-qaeda and Iranian backed terrorists). al-Qaeda have already stated their goals of using Iraq as the center of their caliphate to launch future attacks against America. And Iran has already promised to fill the void if we leave Iraq. This is one reason why the isolationist foreign policy views of Barr and Ron Paul are rejected.
And is also a complete fantasy.
Both terrorist factions have essentially been detroyed by coalition and Iraqi forces.
These factions have not been destroyed but many have been, at least temporarily, run out of major Iraq cities. The Taliban, those enablers of 911, and Al-Qaeda have certainly not been destroyed as evidenced by their resurgence in Afganistan.
You can continue to believe that our "Compassionate" bleeding heart military and security tactics will gain us the geopolitical stability that seems to be the new holy grail. I don't buy it for a minute and, unfortunately, the cost of the attempts are so great they just might destroy this Country.
You had claimed that your plan would have caused ‘Lots of civilian casualties.’ Without intel gathered from ground troops, how would you successfully take out Saddam and other terrorists in Iraq, without knowing their location? Also, how would your plan ensure that Iraq is not taken over by either al-qaeda or Iran, both of which present a threat to the security of the U.S. Both terrorist factions have essentially been detroyed by coalition and Iraqi forces. Without ground troops gathering intel, how would you destroy these factions?
“And is also a complete fantasy.”
No it isn’t. The Iraqis have a democratically elected government are are waging war on both al-qaeda and Iranian backed terrorists.
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.