US Moves Equipment From Saudi Base to Qatar

U.S. military forces are moving out of Sultan Air Base Saudi Arabia, according to an unconfirmed report from the Saudi Information Agency, a Washington D.C. based dissident group.

The equipment is allegedly being moved to a military base in neigboring Qatar, which also hosts U.S. forces.

The report comes after a Washington Post story in January that quoted an unnamed Saudi embassy official as saying the kingdom would ask Washington to move its forces out.

"That I question a government and it's intentions that has shown little or no reason for me to trust it means I belong with the Moores and Baldwins of the world?"

You kind Sir/Madam are the one who is cited earlier in the thread as saying, "That isn't the kind of America I will feel proud to live in" at the thought of America "carrying a big stick".

And just who OR what do you assume stopped the former USSR from invading Western Europe? Same of the Nazis. China overrunning all of Asia. Good manners?? Respect?? Love of thy neighbor?? Just maybe it was and still is American presense.

Because we're not in Kansas anymore Toto, we'll have to adopt Teddy Roosevelt "big stick" theory, except when evil leaders happen to be ignoring the "speak softly" part...As to you my friend, who apparently is embarrassed by America, may you find more comfort and "pride" in sharing your utopian ideals with the likes of malcontented "AINOs" Moore and Baldwin.

Good points. But, we're dealing with individuals, not nations. Look back at those you listed. They have faces, borders, and cities. Our enemy is a religion of individuals. How do we fight them, absent a continual guerilla campaign, worldwide?

BTW, I like how you fly straight up while accelerating, but I'm just a MiG21.

"But we're dealing with individuals, not nations...Our enemy is a religion of individuals. How do we fight them absent a continual guerilla campaign worldwide?

The "campaign" starts at home. Selectively deport individuals who in the least are suspected or tied to any number of radical Islamic groups operating in America; Deport ALL illegals, re-register US worker applicants for as long as it takes, and declare a moritorium on ALL official immigration for a period of five years until the INS can extricate their heads from their lower orifice. If the politicians at this point cannot put US security ahead of political correctness, then we are indeed doomed no matter what.

BTW, I not only can "fly straight up while accelerating", but am so armed that I can even shoot Milk Duds or drop water-ballons if I wanted. Hmmm, a MiG21? I hear they're in the garage too much ;-)

Terrorists operate in so many countries it's mind boggling. There's quite a few of them here in fact.

All the countries I mentioned support terrorists in some form or another and the true list is much longer than that. China has a strong history of it and we apparently no longer need a country to fly a plane into the WTC to bomb the heck out of it. It wasn't a country that did it in the first place. What's good for Iraq should be good for China and all the rest of the countries I mentioned if we are going to go about this on principle. Wait and see, I don't think that is really the motivator here.

If we had reservations about taking Sadam out after he blatantly attacked another country to expand his empire what happened to them? Does anyone even remember what they were? The link between Al Qaeda and Iraq is tenuous at best, why do you think the news is reporting that Sadam met with Osama now and providing precious few details besides that statement? That news bit is for our consumption.

I just like a little more than "we should have done it ten years ago" and "he has ties to terrorists" before I heartily support dropping bombs on people with my name on them. Because every time our government drops a bomb it has all of our names on it. What we seem to be ready to do is bomb the hell out of any country that supports any "terrorist" group regardless of whether that group has inflicted harm, intends to inflict harm, has thought about inflicting harm, or even appears similar to a group that might inflict harm on America. I can tell very few people seem to agree with me but I just consider that to be morally wrong.

I'm not embarrassed by America. I love this country and, most especially, what it stands for more than you will ever know. I'll take your insinuations and the scum you want to associate me with in stride.

I have no problems with what we did in WWII. I also support North Korea and Vietnam and the efforts to stem the spread of communism. I also thought the Gulf War was crucial. The big difference is all of those conflicts were started by other countries and we used our might to stop those who would conquer by force.

This case is a little different and it appears to be the beginning of us using our might to conquer. What if we don't like the next person to come to power in Iraq? I guess we bomb them too or we make sure the right kind of ruler gets in, either way we are the ones initiating force.

I support using our resources to dig out and remove every last vestige of Al Qaeda. Do I think bombing Afghanistan did that? No, but it helped since the Taliban was such a staunch supporter. Do I think bombing Iraq or any of the other 60 countries who have supported some terrorist group in some way will do it? Doubtful. Do I think obliterating any group that has inflicted harm on America is appropriate? You can bet your last dollar. Do I think oblitering any group who may have thought about it or who we think looks like a group who has thought about it is appropriate? You can tell the answer to that one from this thread.

I have no problem with differences of opinion but I do have a right to explain my side and discuss this subject in a rational manner.

Your post does not make a lot of sense. I suspect some "nots" etc. are missing.

There is a clear goal however, and that is to rid the World of any who would commit or assist the commission of acts of terror against U.S. assets, citizens or interests. What is so hard to understand about that?

Since you claim not to be a pacifist, I presume you are an Islamic apologist.

Thank you for a thoughtful response, albeit we are in disagreement on the issue of our respective perceptions of whether future flexing of US military muscle is in the name of "conquest", OR a matter of pre-emptive self-preservation. You moreless see it as the former; I the latter...

We can no longer stand idly by while evil leaders conspire, support, or hatch the planned destruction of America. It is indeed unfortunate that some rogue States or certain people cannot be, nor will not ever be depended on to yield to a "common sense" to a "common good" in the name of peace. History has proven negotiations with genetically predispostioned warriors have proven futile in the past as well as the present, as well as in the future, and as such must be dealt with in the only manner and language they seem to understand -- an overwhelming armed tour de force and the mettle to use it if necessary.

If that, my friend appears to be our only option, and thus a sad commentary on human nature, that is because, IT IS.

Have we not yet learned from the Neville Chamberlains of the world?

And thank you for your understanding and point of view. I certainly won't cry if and when Sadam gets his.

I said a couple of years ago if there is anything to the new world order and globalist theories then we will see two things in the near future. 1) We'll see America become subdued, a large scale continuous threat will emerge, speaking against the government will become more intollerable, larger and more comprehensive UN treaties like the global tax will be approved, we'll have a weaker economy continuously flirting with recession, and ever more government control of every aspect of life. 2) We will also see the religious fundamentalists of the world become subdued one way or another.

From what I understand a global government is supposed to be, neither a free America nor radical fundamentalists are tollerable. I hope our economy really gets rolling again and Bush walks out on those UN talks. If not I will be more and more concerned as the number of countries we decide to take to task increases. Right now all signs are we will stop with Iraq but it seemed to me until recently we would stop after Afghanistan and the Taliban were dealt with. I don't know if I'm ready to give the theories about global government my full belief but if all my predictions come true I will find it harder and harder not to.

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.