Posted on 02/17/2009 8:30:18 AM PST by stan_sipple
The United States needs to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan until it has achieved a decisive victory over Islamic jihadists, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum said Monday.
“Containing them is not enough,” the two-term conservative Republican senator said during a telephone interview.
Santorum, who will be in Lincoln Tuesday for two speaking appearances, said Islamic radicals view the election of President Barack Obama as a signal that the United States is “in the process of surrender.”
Obama plans to order a phased withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq over the next 16 months.
Although he is preparing to send more combat troops to Afghanistan, the president has launched a review of U.S. policy goals in that war-torn nation.
“We need to show the U.S. is not going to get out of the fight because the cost is high,” Santorum said.
“We need to say we will stay and be tough and we will not leave until we win.”
The United States needs to understand “the jihadists believe Islam should expand,” Santorum said.
“Part of the game is getting the West to be accepting or, in fact, submissive to what Islam wants.”
Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions must be contained “by all means necessary,” he said.
On other matters, Santorum said Obama and the Democratic Congress chose not to produce a bipartisan economic stimulus bill despite their rhetoric.
“He’s 0 for 1 and (it’s) going to come back to haunt them,” Santorum said. “This is all his now.
“The deficit is going to dramatically increase and there will be little to no economic growth.”
Santorum will address the annual Lancaster County Republican Party Lincoln-Reagan dinner tonight at the Grand Manse at 6:30.
Then, he’ll speak at the Nebraska Union on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln campus at 8 p.m.
I’m not as concerned about Iraq under our new President as I was six months ago to be honest. We’ve won there at this point, and I just can’t see him turning this clear victory into a defeat.
He doesn’t want to be a one term President, folks.
Afghanistan, however, is a different situation. Its here the new President could pull a ‘LBJ’ and really screw things up.
A losing battle, Senator Santorum.
We’re under the control of the Mussolini-Pelosi Fascist party. There’s no way that they’re going to listen to you. “National Security” no longer exists.
Rick testing the waters for a run?
Isn’t he the guy that gave us Specter?
Any chance of convincing Santorum to run against Specter in 2010?
No.
Way to go Rick. Now if only you had been a conservative a couple of years ago, you would still be in the senate.
Great minds....I advanced the same thought on another thread.
We can’t afford to continue to be a nanny state in Afghanistan and Iraq. Where does Santorum intend to get the money to pay for all this? Obama’s printing press?
I thought there was a conservative who was close to beating Specter in the primary, (Toomee or some spelling like that), and Santorum endorsed Specter?
I’d say its more being a ‘nanny’ to Afghanistan than Iraq. Iraq has enormous oil reserves, and as such can pay its own way eventually.
Afghanistan, on the other hand, only has one serious cash crop, and thats poppies. We can’t afford to prop them up...but as 9/11 demonstrated conclusively, we can’t afford to ignore it either.
Tought scenario no matter who is President.
You can probably figure out that these were the same people who complained the loudest when the Bill Ayers lecture was cancelled because of thousands of phone calls to the university....
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.