Originally posted by: jpeyton
Originally posted by: chucky2
It's a long term committment that we'll be making for the long-term results (hint: Think in 30- 50 years we'll be seeing the positive results).
At $275 million a day, it's a long term commitment this country can't afford, and we are already seeing the results of our lax fiscal policies here at home with the stock market and housing crash. You can't print money out of thin-air without a consequence. 30-50 years at $275 million a day is over $3 trillion of this country's wealth (plus the billions in interest per day to finance it) down the drain. The question is, why are you so eager to ship the wealth of America to Iraq with no return to show for it?
So it's $3T of our own wealth invested largely back into our own economy largely employing our own people. Got it, Thanks. For that we eventually get cheaper oil (or oil that hasn't risen in price as much as it would have), preferential treatment (China and the rest of the developing countries need for the same oil we want/need isn't decreasing...it's increasing, fast), and what will hopefully be a Muslim ally in the ME - and not one where the Royal's take the money, F their people over, and we take the blame for the corruption (which to a certain exent we share some of the blame).
Well, unless you can produce some linkage where soldiers are going on the record as saying they're getting orders from on high to kill, maim, rape, and steal from Iraqi's, then maybe you should cut out you own horse sh1t huh?
They are ordered to shoot as ordered, not think and act independently. Our soldiers aren't mercenaries; they are tools. Like a rifle, or a tank. You give them orders and they carry them out.
So, you have no proof. So this was a total manufacture from you to implicate our soldiers doing things they're not doing. Got it.
I like how your attitude is totally negative..."ruin" a nation. In 10 years when it's one of the most prosperous nations in the ME, are you going to call it ruined then?
Which one is it? 10 years? 30-50 years? Are we
turning the corner in Iraq? If you knew anything about the situation in Iraq, there is no way it will be more prosperous than nations like Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait in 10 years.
I'd say 10 years or less (as long as stability stays at or above current levels) for marked improvemnt and 30-50 years before the country is a total ME powerhouse and true US ally. Will it be
more prosperous than SA or Iran? SA would be tough to compete with, but Iran is basically doing everything it can do for the world community not to trust it, so that wouldn't surprise me. Maybe if the entrenched Leadership (both religious and political) in Iran gets overthrown or just plain ignored Iran will succeed...otherwise I think they're going to be on a long rocky road...
That's a positive sign at least...we'd have to chalk you up to a Macro type if you were going to start railing against that...
It's hilarious that you are non-interventionist when it comes to becoming free of foreign oil, and eliminating our support for Israel, yet you support a war in Iraq that is the single most interventionist action our country has committed since Vietnam.
Ummm, being free of foreign oil isn't interventionist or non-interventionist, it's called being energy independent. They are two different things...you know that right??? As far as Israel, IMHO they don't deserve our support simply because the creation of that state was a F up from the get go, and from the start, the Israeli's started F'ing over the Palestinians...and still do to this day. Yes the Palestinians respond in kind, but, what does anyone expect? Just on Israel's actions alone I don't support us supporting them. We should go hands off - no preferential treatment, no UN resolution blocking unless it's a clear gang up on Israel type resolution - and let them and the Palestinians fight it out. Whowever is left standing, That's the winner.
I don't dream at all. Unfortunately a smart bomb is not enough of a deterrant though...hey, USSR, we've got smart bombs! Hmmm...that doesn't seem to carry the weight of a somewhat larger bomb...
The USSR is a relic of the Cold War too. And what does Russia have to do with Muslim terrorists. I think it's time for you to regroup here.
You are not getting it. If you want to go hands off and trust that the other party is going to leave you alone, you better make them aware that when you go hands off, there's one big MF'ing stick if they decide to test the waters. That way they make d@mn sure to police their own.
When we're free of foreign oil, then you'll get your wish. Until then, prepare for the US to be involved. It's the price the Fed. that you slam pays for keeping the gas in your car, the lights on in your town, and the economy that sustains you, going. When you move into the mountains and live off the land totally, then you can b1tch without being a hypocrite...until then, it's being done on your and 300M other peoples behalfs.
The foreigners will still sell us their oil without war. Did we have to invade China for them to sell their manufacturing base to us? Did we invade Canada to get their oil?
Yes, but will they do so so cheaply? And at the volumes we need? And in the time we need it? And at a level of service we can depend on? And etc.? The Chinese don't sell us sh1t because we didn't invade them, they sell us sh1t because we're consumers and because they have the capacity to produce it and because it drivers their economy. When Chinese wages rise - and they will rise eventually (driving up costs to us) - and if, ever, their capacity cannot keep up with worldwide demand, then maybe your example here will make sense. Until then it's apples to oranges. Canada is our next door neighbor...I doubt we'd ever invade them. Now you've gone to apples and bowling balls...
Someone who'll scream today about us being interventionist, and then tomorrow when something really bad happens going Why didn't the Fed. do something?!
Actually, for the record, I don't support any of the Fed's latest actions. Our irresponsible fiscal policies created a boom, and a bust is inevitable; the Fed is only delaying (and probably worsening) it.
I'm not talking about internal
economic boom or bust...
The WMD thing is out of the bag....it will be only a matter of time before some nation gets hit with a real WMD. It's not a matter of if it's a matter of when. Given the effects of one, I'd rather have the gov. actually doing something rather than what you want, which is nothing (or next to nothing...which is basically the same thing).
I agree fully. How as Iraq, or the other actions of our current administration, reduced the existence of WMDs or global terrorism?
Answer: it hasn't. The National Intelligence Estimate has already told us on several occasions that global terrorism has increased since our invasion of Iraq. Iraq didn't have WMDs. Our own government agencies are telling us Iran isn't building a nuclear bomb. al-Qaeda is group with no national government, no army, no navy, no tanks and no precision guided missiles. Forgive me if I don't think a multi-trillion dollar military operation and occupation is the best solution to the threat.
Surprisingly, I'm going to agree with you somewhat here. Other than killing lots of terrorist types, recruitment is up because of our policies. Other than taking out Saddam, who was basically untrustable and would have eventually aquired a WMD type weapon, nothing has changed.
However, that's all short term. For sure the WoT is taking the fight
to the terrorists instead of letting them always come to us. For sure the WoT is sending messages to Leadership in the worlds countries that something will be done about these nutjobs, and that the US expects their help (it's interventionist, but hey, if they need some prodding, so be it).
Our own government agencies are telling us they don't
think Iran is building a nuke, but they don't
know. And of course Iran continues to enrich, even when Russia can supply them with whatever they need? Why is that again???
It's funny how you point out AQ is a group that has no borders. Just
how then do you expect to counter that threat?? What leverage do you propose to exert over world Leaders in these countries/provinces/territories to convince them to use their resources to partner with you instead of AQ? Or at minimum at least not be ambivelent towards AQ? What's your long term plan for countering AQ if you don't want us to be interventionists, and you want us to go hands off on Israel (who like it or not, you know gives us primo intelligence)? How, short of complete energy indepenedence from ME oil and controlling each and every one of the people who enter the US, plus screening all materials that enter the US, do you plan on negating AQ money (which, comes from somewhere) and dedication?
I guess what it boils down to jpeyton is that there's all these huge issues, and what you want POTUS to do is basically to do
nothing. Now, that is
one way to hopefully not have another 9/11, and maybe it would work. Given the dedication of AQ (and, people willing to blow themselves up is as dedicated as it gets), Taliban, etc. types...I think that's basically the one way that guarantees failure.
Chuck
