Posted on 06/07/2015 9:24:41 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says he wouldn’t rule out a full-blown re-invasion of Iraq if he were to become the next commander-in-chief.
The likely Republican presidential candidate and early frontrunner in several polls said he would consider a re-invasion if it were deemed necessary to protect American national security at home and abroad.
"It would not be limited to anything out there," Walker told ABC's Jonathan Karl in an exclusive interview with for “This Week.” "Once we start saying how far we're willing to go or how many troops we're willing to invest, we send a horrible message, particularly to foes in the Middle East who are willing to wait us out."
Walker has been critical of President Obama’s handling of Iraq and Syria for its limited scope but also qualified that he does not believe in “open-ended, limitless engagements.” Though he has been sparse in offering specific changes to U.S. policy in the fight against ISIS, the likely presidential candidate said he has been deepening his understanding of international affairs in recent months....
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
No smart warrior or negotiator publicly rules out anything.
Yes, when we get a real American pres back in the WH, he will have a major task cleaning up after Obama and his ilk.
He will now be labeled a war monger.
awaiting wailing&teeth-gnashing from the peanut gallery
Maybe we could just bomb our enemies with cheese and beer.. and electric cars.
‘Major’ is an understatement. ‘Herculean’ may be more fitting methinks.
zactly.
zactly.
[snip] It would not be limited to anything out there,” Walker told ABC’s Jonathan Karl in an exclusive interview with for “This Week.” “Once we start saying how far we’re willing to go or how many troops we’re willing to invest, we send a horrible message, particularly to foes in the Middle East who are willing to wait us out. [/snip]
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet. Related:
Obama Lambasted for Ruling Out Military Option on Iran
Arutz Sheva | 6/7/2015, 4:09 PM | Hillel Fendel
Posted on 06/07/2015 7:39:28 AM PDT by Dave346
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3297791/posts
This entire cycle is going to be another endless series of ‘gotcha’ headlines like this. No candidate should rule out anything militarily because it ends in a weak hand. The purpose of having a strong military is to use the threat of force to get your way without using it. We could call it Reagan 101. The Obama era is a reflection of the dumbed down American people who don’t get that weakness leads to more problems than strength. That signaling pulpit dates simply embolden the enemy and lead to bigger problems in the aftermath.
This headline is supposed to scare idiot voters that republicans are just warmongers and only democrats bring ‘peace’. It doesn’t matter the substance of Walker’s response. Only the resulting scary headline.
I’m not sure an invasion is the way to go. When I hear the “experts” saying we need to reintegrate the sunnis into the Iraqi political process I just know they don’t get it.
Iraq is irreparably broken. I don’t know what the solution is but trying to glue it together with more American blood isn’t it.
Title says it all.
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.
Oshkosh won’t argue.
Anyone who advocates another invasion of Iraq can kiss his presidential aspirations goodbye. If anything, the candidate in 2016 who calls for any politician who pushed for the 2003 invasion to be strung up from the Washington Monument would probably win in a landslide.
—Iraq is irreparably broken. I don’t know what the solution is but trying to glue it together with more American blood isn’t it.
Agreed. Let the Sunni’s and Shits fight it out and partition themselves; and the Kurds continue to build something on the side. Iran and ISIS are the real ballgame.
My sense is that the next president will have many problems on the plate.
Russia, China and North Korea......
The problem post 9/11 was that the foreign policy elite kept us on track with same old limited war policies of Korea and Vietnam.
The whole region from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan should have been dealt with post 9/11 but wasn’t because the Uniparty elites put the world economy of the corporate elites first, an economy fed with Arab $$$$$ from Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia etc.
The Gulf Arabs helped fuel the fight against Syria that created the Islamic State.
I think its their problem to clean up.
KEEP OUR TROOPS HOME. IN 1991 THE ARABS PAID US TO BE MERCENARIES AND KICK SADAAM OUT OF KUWAIT.
Bahrain is spending 15 million dollars to give the British a naval base in the region.
In the old days the Arab Legion fought for the British, now it looks like the British Legion is supposed to fight for the Arabs. A former British commander suggested 5-thousand UK troops the other week.
Is there an “American Legion” on the way to do the Arabs fighting for them if we get a GOP Establishment team back in power like the Bush ones.
I’m fine with the idea of helping the Kurds and Christians secure their own territory and I’m OK with supporting their fight against ISIS but that’s a whole different ballgame than invading.
Hey Vet, I posted a similar thread above, and asked the mod to take it down.
There are not enough Duggars to continue these wars...STOP IMPORTING THESE SCUM
Good God.
SMH.
You don't back yourself into a corner - in any direction. Anyone with a brain realizes that. Walker did.
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.