Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LibertarianInExile
There was a big difference between Ross Perot and the surrender monkey. Ross Perot did not want to see our military destroyed. Nor did he blame America for every problem in the world. Ross Perot wanted America safe through strength. Cut and Run thinks if we appease our enemies enough they will leave us alone.
How did that work for England under Nevile Chamberlain?
The most important duty of a president is to keep America safe. Cut and Run thinks the best way for us to be safe is to surrender.
83 posted on 12/17/2011 3:46:27 AM PST by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: John D
"There was a big difference between Ross Perot and the surrender monkey. Ross Perot did not want to see our military destroyed. Nor did he blame America for every problem in the world. Ross Perot wanted America safe through strength. Cut and Run thinks if we appease our enemies enough they will leave us alone."

I must have missed the big "peace in our time," surrender-first speech. Sorry. I don't get C-SPAN3 on my local cable provider.

"How did that work for England under Nevile [sic] Chamberlain?"

Particularly lousy, because England kept up this thing called THE BRITISH EMPIRE. Being an imperialist nation means you have to involve yourself in world domination games, and appeasement is akin to quitting the game. However, aren't you the type that said we went to war in Iraq for world peace and nation-building and national defense? Did I miss that C-SPAN episode where the U.S. decided to go the world domination route? Or have we gone back to the Manifest Destiny/bear any burden b.s.?

"The most important duty of a president is to keep America safe. Cut and Run thinks the best way for us to be safe is to surrender."

If I see you and your buddy in a schoolyard fight, it is not surrendering if I let you both have at it and walk on. How is it surrendering to say that it is wrong that America has been standing up for borders in Pakistan, Korea, Kuwait and now Iraq, and should instead divert that military might to police its own? Surrendering is saying that the countries and citizens we should protect are thousands of miles away, not within our own sovereign territory? Who knew? Besides you, of course!

101 posted on 12/21/2011 8:39:22 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Newt Gingrich, a great conservative? Before he was Speaker and had to walk the walk, sure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson