Skip to comments.
Columnist Pat Buchanan Asks, "Will We Stay the Course in Iraq?"
WND.com
| 07-23-03
| Buchanan, Patrick J.
Posted on 07/23/2003 8:36:55 AM PDT by Theodore R.
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
To: B.Bumbleberry; Alberta's Child
Going into Iraq was a bold strike to nip the problem in the bud. I hate to think of how many lives of American soldiers would be sacrificed if we let the Middle East get out of control. We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01, due to our lack of focusing on the Middle East.
21
posted on
07/23/2003 9:26:09 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: B.Bumbleberry
For over 20 years, radical Islamic groups have wantonly killed Americans and got away with it. Buchanan is willing to appeal to the bases form of fear and cowardliness to get as many wimps as he can to hurt the Republicans. Pat's not a Republican. He even left the party. He's a pure egotist and a menace to those who protect our country. He's willing to stab America in the back to get ahead. Shame on him.
22
posted on
07/23/2003 9:26:52 AM PDT
by
elhombrelibre
(Liberalism corrupts. Absolute Liberalism corrupts absolutely.)
To: elhombrelibre
For over 20 years, radical Islamic groups have wantonly killed Americans and got away with it. This too, though oil is the overriding interest.
To: liberallarry
The culture that produced 911 is violent, frustrated, angry, and humiliated. And how many Iraqis exactly were involved in 9-11?
To: B.Bumbleberry
Do you really think that this war was about guarding banks? Absolutely not. Which is why the @sshole who decided to put U.S. soldiers at risk by assigning them to guard banks should be fired immediately and prosecuted for dereliction of duty.
Just fast forward in your mind what a fix we would be in if the nut cases took control and cut off oil to this country.
OK, so then it is all about oil after all?
To: Dane
We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01, due to our lack of focusing on the Middle East. Correction -- We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01 due to our lack of focusing on the United States.
Any U.S. response to 9/11 that does not include the sacking of every incompetent bureaucrat in the FBI, CIA, INS, etc. is both inadequate and misdirected.
To: EggsAckley
not to quible with your language, but whether or not Iraq has a government has no effect on its Nationhood. Scotland is a legit nation and it hasn't been a State in 100s of years. Nations and States are different animals. Sometimes one is the other, other times a State (like the United Kingdom) is made up of several Nations, or bits of Different Nations.
27
posted on
07/23/2003 9:51:23 AM PDT
by
Murtyo
To: Alberta's Child
Correction -- We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01 due to our lack of focusing on the United States. Any U.S. response to 9/11 that does not include the sacking of every incompetent bureaucrat in the FBI, CIA, INS, etc. is both inadequate and misdirected.
So basically what you are saying is that there is no danger of any radical islamic or radical dictatorship in the Middle East developing WMD.
Am I right?
28
posted on
07/23/2003 9:51:39 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Theodore R.
Newspapers and networks are saturated with stories of soldiers being ambushed, wounded, killed; of troops anxious to return home; of Shiites turning against the occupation; of rising costs and falling support for President Bush Gee Pat .. kind of like what you are doing
29
posted on
07/23/2003 9:52:01 AM PDT
by
Mo1
(Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
To: Alberta's Child
We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01 due to our lack of focusing on the United StatesHow so? How would focusing on the United States prevented bin Laden's forces from attacking us again?
30
posted on
07/23/2003 9:52:36 AM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: deport
I wonder if PJB has learned anything about this country since his ill fated presidential runs? Since??
He hasn't learned anything period
31
posted on
07/23/2003 9:54:03 AM PDT
by
Mo1
(Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
To: Mo1
He's an apologist for Saddam or he's soft on Saddam. Either one, he'd have never accepted the way he acts towards Saddam by a Democrat doing the same for Communists. Pat's played out.
32
posted on
07/23/2003 9:59:36 AM PDT
by
elhombrelibre
(Liberalism corrupts. Absolute Liberalism corrupts absolutely.)
To: Dane
We lost 3,000 people on 9/11/01, due to our lack of focusing on the Middle East. Wrong. We lost 3,000 people due to our lack of focusing on America.
Wrong. We lost 3,000 people due to our lack of focusing on America. IMO Pat was the only one vocally concerned about 'borders' and immigration. Pat's the only one, who had the guts to say that groups who want to come here and not assimilate, or are incapable of assimilation, should not be allowed in. They could be better helped in their own country. Why import problems? Pat also said we should have a immigration moratorium to properly 'assimilate' those who are here.
Pat was/is right most of the time.
33
posted on
07/23/2003 10:00:32 AM PDT
by
duckln
To: Dane
Pakistan has already developed its own nuclear arsenal. I don't necessarily see this as a good thing, but I'm not taking a month off from work to dig a bomb shelter in my back yard, either.
The irony of the situation in Iraq was this -- the U.S. probably had a far better chance to control the development of WMD's in the Middle East when Saddam Hussein was in power than it does now.
To: Catspaw
How would focusing on the United States prevented bin Laden's forces from attacking us again? When the first Muslim showed up in flight school and said he wanted to learn to fly but wasn't interested in landing a plane, even a second-grader would have told you that something wasn't quite right.
For the U.S. to wage war in the Middle East to "combat terror," while at the same time allowing nearly unfettered access to this country by people all over the globe, is the height of idiocy.
To: Alberta's Child
Pakistan has already developed its own nuclear arsenal. I don't necessarily see this as a good thing, but I'm not taking a month off from work to dig a bomb shelter in my back yard, either India also has had it's own nuclear program for almost 30 years now.
That keeps Pakistan in check, IMO.
But you didin't answer the original question, do you think it's okey dokey for pre-saddam Iraq and present day Iran pursuing a nuclear program.
36
posted on
07/23/2003 10:08:27 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Alberta's Child
For the U.S. to wage war in the Middle East to "combat terror," while at the same time allowing nearly unfettered access to this country by people all over the globe, is the height of idiocy. And Ashcroft has been tryong to crackdown on such practices, even with the onslaught of criticism from the press and demos.
Remember these terrorists got their "training" on Clinton's watch.
37
posted on
07/23/2003 10:10:57 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Dane
But you didin't answer the original question, do you think it's okey dokey for pre-saddam Iraq and present day Iran pursuing a nuclear program. The way I see it, there's not much of a difference between pre-Saddam Iraq or present-day Iran pursuing a nuclear program and any other nation in the world pursuing a nuclear program.
To: elhombrelibre
In a January editorial in his "American Conservative" magazine, PJB said:
"While the war party spits out tired insults about Gallic Weakness, Paris seems to us a wise ally, trying to prevent an old friend from acting against her deeper interests."
Why did we ever think he was a conservative?
39
posted on
07/23/2003 10:14:39 AM PDT
by
Deb
(Do these jeans make my tag look big?)
To: Dane
And Ashcroft has been tryong to crackdown on such practices . . . Fingerprinting Muslim immigrants at airports is one thing. Anyone who is intent on doing harm to this country will not be deterred from doing so just because his fingerprint is on file at FBI headquarters.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson