Posted on 01/17/2019 8:23:18 AM PST by RandFan
Freshman Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) is criticizing Sen. Rand Paul, saying the Kentucky Republican gave President Trump "bad advice" when he suggested that the U.S. declare victory in Afghanistan and Syria.
"There are those of us who have sacrificed for our nation, who know the importance of this terrorist threat and the need to stay vigilant," tweeted Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL, on Wednesday. "We go there so that they don’t come here. It’s that simple."
Crenshaw, who wears an eyepatch due to an injury sustained in combat, was responding to a tweet from Paul in which the senator said he has "never been prouder" of Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Sorry Dan, you were going down a good road until this. If we were serious about this threat here’s my ROE. If terrorists mess with us or our allies we unleash virtual hell on them until the threat is gone, then we bounce the rubble just to make a point. Bullies only understand overwhelming force. We subjugate the enemy until he no longer has a choice to bend to our will. No nation building with people that can’t recognize civilization.
I read this sort of nonsense and just assume the guy is a moron.
He's better than a Democrat, but that's not saying much. Pneumonia is better than tuberculosis, I suppose -- but I don't want either one of them.
We need a base of operation when the next terrorist group rises up and starts threating this country and Americans.
You and liberaltarians like Paul are as clueless as Barry was. Ignoring Islamic terrorist isn't going to result in Islamic terrorist leaving us alone. It's a stupid premise.
It's absolutely American First to keep some troops and a base of operation to combat an Islamic terrorist threat that will arise.
You're advocating the Obama foreign policy which gave us ISIS. Trump ran on protecting this nation from Islamic terrorist and peace through strength.
If you’re still fighting a war in a third world shit hole after seventeen years, there is no winning it. Go home.
Well stated. The “success” stories speak for themselves.
I liked Crenshaw until this.
I didn’t. He spends far too much time running his mouth taking shots at easy targets instead of engaging Democrats. He seems to have the self promoting Beltway Swamp game down pat. He’s Ben Sasse with prior service.
It’s absolutely American First to keep some troops and a base of operation to combat an Islamic terrorist threat that will arise.
If these ops really was about “America First” we’d have no problem securing our border while playing in the sand box. Clearly, there is another agenda at work here.
It won't go away, since Islam is a belief in a supernatural being and doing his bidding, by following the examples set by his messenger Muhammad. - Tom
War is largely asymmetrical today. The bad guys move in small units and mostly do ambushes. We can respond in companies, not divisions.
He’s a good guy, and I like him very much. But he’s wrong in this. A perpetual game of whack a mole in deep central Asia is not keeping America safe. At this point we are fighting terrorists who weren’t born when 9/11 hit.
When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So of course a SEAL would think we need to be there forever.
At this point it is a hollow tree full of bees and we keep whacking it with a board, swatting the angry bees, claiming we are protecting our house. We are now creating more terrorists.
The answer is to hermetically seal islamic nations off from America. The 9/11 guys all came here on Visas. The Saudis funded them.
This war is a diversion from what they are doing, not/doing, here at home. We are 6 trillion in the hole from it and no safer.
The bottom line, you aren’t really serious about making sure we aren’t “fighting them here” if your centerpiece isn’t a wall, and discussing the 850,000 moslems (and the 16 increase in Saudi student visas) Bush the idiot gave us after 9/11. Then Obama let in another 850,000 and God alone knows how many strolled in over the border.
Add in the ones they whelped after they arrived, and after 9/11 Bush and Obama let in around 2 million of the enemy. This includes a healthy dose of the skinnies from Blackhawk Down.
Moslems are now routinely winning seats in Congress and got rule changes so they can wear headrags in he chambers. They are cussing the president on TV and building no go zones in some states.
So if you tell me our safety depends on an unwinnable war in Afghanistan, I think you are emotionally involved in it at best. He needs to get his head right on this. He’s wrong.
Also, hate to say it. But he is from Houston. I would guess there are some answers to be found in his contributors. Probably some Bush connected pipeline, oil, and contracting companies on the donor list.
Follow the money.
That is a truly damning comment about a commissioned officer. Being an officer is serious calling akin to being a clergyman. It is deeply serious not only because one may have to die as a result of their calling but that the purpose of the arms bearing society is protection of the larger society, not just mindless belligerence. That may be a good thing in an EM or even an NCO up to SSGT. The soldier serves the statesman but both serve the nation in what should be a deeply serious and profound manner. As you so well point out we are fighting men in Afghanistan that were not born when 9/11 happened. That is the most complete statement of failure that could be made and should cause any military professional pause at what must be a failed strategy he or she is being asked to risk life and limb to execute.
“”We go there so that they don’t come here. It’s that simple.””
I haven’t heard of them building an amphibious landing force and the supporting fleet that would allow them to do this. Or is he one of those that thinks they should come here on a 777 through JFK if they are “vetted”.
The Marines used to have a term “gone asiatic”. It referred to someone who spent too much in China and that became the center of their worldview. They “weren’t right” anymore.
5 will get you 10 that Crenshaw is Bush connected, through donors, social networks, something.
“We need a base of operation when the next terrorist group rises up and starts threating this country and Americans.”
Bullcrap. No islamic nation could delay us more than an hour or two if we decide to go somewhere full force. We don’t need a base.
Also, the more you interact with them, the more influence they have here and in DC.
Play with turds, get crap on your fingers .
I don’t have an opinion on Dan Crenshaw, but I think I know what he is saying. We need to fight over there. Rand Paul is good, too, but he is more of a libertarian and he doesn’t want troops there. Different opinions...They are still better than Dems...
“War is largely asymmetrical today. The bad guys move in small units and mostly do ambushes. We can respond in companies, not divisions.”
Why do you think the Germans didn’t try that small unit ambush business in 1945? Or the Japs? It’s because Divisions broke their will. Then we outlawed their fake religions of Aryan and Hirohito being a god.
We should have nuked Mecca and been done. You only win a war breaking the hearts of the enemy. We keep honoring their sick religion.
I hesitate to jump into this thread as it seems like running into friendly fire.
I don’t really know much about Crenshaw, but I have to agree with the ‘fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here’ approach. Now, does that mean we need to stay in every hellhole out there? No. But we also cant shrink back to our own coast line and expect that bad things wont result.
Trump is right to question our presence in Syria, and to ask what we really are trying to accomplish. But, as an example, you don’t see him saying lets pull out of the ME completely.
It would be good to have a national discussion about what the end state should really look like from 60,000 feet. Is Saudi Arabia an ally? Is Iraq? Is Egypt? How do places like this play in a road map for future anti-terrorist operations?
The problem is we don’t have that discussion in public because a) security concerns, b) politics, and c) the public attention span is mostly too short (as witnessed even here on FR). No, it has to get dumbed down for the public. We are either Globalists or we are isolationist (/sarc). Everything isn’t black or white.
ok. Flame on.
Good point. I'd add: (d) Many people in our government have been financially backed by foreign interests all over the Middle East for years.
Do you think it's just a coincidence that over the last 25 years, the U.S. has been involved in so many military campaigns that benefit Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families that are real estate investment partners of the Bush family?
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.