Cap'n Slappy
|
Long OverdueThis should have been part of the first 100 hours agenda for the Democrats. http://www.rrdailyherald.com/arti...24/breaking_news/breakingnews.txt
|
Kestrel
|
Yeah. Too bad politicans are too worried about being branded as not supporting the troops. I mean after all, are they not being killed over there? Getting them out of Iraq would actually stop them from being shot at and killed. Personally I would like NOT to be shot at.
|
SkygreenLeopard
|
| Quote: | | One version would restrict American troops in Iraq to fighting al-Qaida, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces. |
Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing in the first place!?
|
Kestrel
|
| SunAlsoRises wrote: | | Quote: | | One version would restrict American troops in Iraq to fighting al-Qaida, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces. |
Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing in the first place!? |
I thought we were supposed to be doing that in Afghanistan?
|
flyupsidedown
|
who does like to be shot at. It is an all volunteer army and they sware allegience to the commander-in-chief. If you don't want to be shot at I would suggest not signing up. Staying tru to their brothers in arms, their country and the commander in chief is why we honor them. Especially when they are shot at. It is in the job description. On the other hand, so is killing thousands of insurgents. You're right, we should look for those in the alqaida uniform, check their alqaida life-time membership card and then kill them.
|
Cap'n Slappy
|
What about the people that signed up before the war who's time is up but they aren't allowed to leave? Do you consider that "volunteer"?
|
flyupsidedown
|
That, as most military guys and gals know also goes with the military. It isn't the first time and it won't be the last. Some times they make them leave early as well.
|
Kestrel
|
Funny thing is that I almost ended up in the Army 3 times. Thankfully I didn't...
|
flyupsidedown
|
What do you think about the Iran threat?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Sate...%2FShowFull&cid=1167467834546
|
SkygreenLeopard
|
See this thread:
|
Kestrel
|
| Quote: | The Cold War philosophy of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), which prevented the former Soviet Union and the United States from using the nuclear weapons they had targeted at each other, would not apply to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran, said Lewis.
"For him, Mutual Assured Destruction is not a deterrent, it is an inducement," said Lewis of Ahmadinejad. "We know already that they [Iran's ruling ayatollahs] do not give a damn about killing their own people in great numbers. We have seen it again and again. If they kill large numbers of their own people, they are doing them a favor. They are giving them a quick, free pass to heaven. I find all that very alarming," said Lewis.
|
LOL Last I checked, the Soviet Union killed plenty of their own people too. And Ahmadinejad is not the ayatollah. Also, I heard that Ahmadinejad has become unpopular with the people and ayatollah, which is the real holder of power in Iran.
If I were president, I would visit Iran, publicly apologize for overthrowing an elected government in 1953, and setting up the Shah. Then I would speak to the ayatollah, and tell him that while we are not happy that arms that appear to be from Iran are showing up in Iraq, we have no wish to invade Iran. But nuclear weapons would cause us to target Iran with our nuclear weapons, which would be bad for both countries.
|
|
|