CUT and RUN ... the PLAN for AMERICAS FUTURE

[Diamond Cross]

If it was through official government treaties, I wouldn't have a problem with it. And it is the people and their government who want us there. A great example is Saudi Arabia. It was Reagan who got us there, for the Saudi government asked us to provide military preotection in exchange for oil trade.

So what's wrong with us building bases if we're wanted there by the government? If we had forced our way there I could see the problem, but since we are wanted there, and I stress they are there because they are wanted there, there shouldn't be a problem.

If I didn't like it though, I wouldn't pull a Bin Laden. But there's be nothing I could about it.

SO have you read the Fatwah?

[Vietvet]

Originally Posted by alan1000

Attacking me, when you do not know me is not helping your cause, and it is very convenient to assume that everyone on the right never served, which I am sure you yourself does not believe, and taking it one step further, the only reason most on the left who have served use the left for their own self interest, their benefits.

Now, whether you like the war or not is not the point anymore, we are long past that, we have a job to finish, and without pointing fingers at anyone, we must finish it. Bush's decision to go into Iraq will be a story history will write it is far to early to call his decision, right or wrong. We should not be led astray with the rhetoric and the chest puffing and who's right and who's wrong. be back to see you, you can be sure of it

Democrats only criticize, I have seen nothing from them other then mud slinging and inciting the terrorist. When they really want to come to the table and help then I will have a better opinion of their commitment to win for America

It seems Americas defeat is in their best political advantage, and for that I am sad.

And by the way, I am too a Viet Nam Vet, not a hero like John Kerry, just one of many who served and served proudly.

You are trying to put words in my mouth now. I didn't "attack"you personally. I simply stated that most people who I've heard use the term "cut and run" are chickenhawks. I was talking about Cheney, Bush, Hannity, Limbaugh, and others who "cut and ran" when THEY had a chance to serve. I didn't say YOU did, precisely because I didn't know anything about you. So, since you've been to Vietnam, what do YOU think about all these "chickenhawks" using that term? Personally, I don't like it.

How exactly would you define finishing "the job?" Do you really think a coalition government will work in Iraq? That Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds will all just end up being one big happy family? I mean,think about it. These people have been fighting each other for thousands of years. Do you think our military might is going to make them all sit around the campfire singin' KUMBIYA together? It won't happen. Assuming you agree with that basic premise (and MAYBE you don't) how do you define "victory?" I say "victory" in Iraq is just another meaningless term. The same as "cut and run", or "stay the course." NONE of these terms are based in reality. Neither is Bushco.Bushco is not grounded in the real world. They are engaged in a fantasy world of "good guys and bad guys." Those who still follow them after all the evidence debunking all their hare-brained theories? I'm sorry, but those of you who do are delusional. It was a mistake to invade Iraq to begin with, and you don't correct a mistake by compounding it. You admit you made a mistake, correct it, and move on. Bush won't do it. We need someone who will. Failing that, we need to elect a Congress that will FORCE him to do the right thing. For once in his spoiled-rotten silver-spooned fantasy of a life.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

If it was through official government treaties, I wouldn't have a problem with it. And it is the people and their government who want us there. A great example is Saudi Arabia. It was Reagan who got us there, for the Saudi government asked us to provide military preotection in exchange for oil trade.

So what's wrong with us building bases if we're wanted there by the government? If we had forced our way there I could see the problem, but since we are wanted there, and I stress they are there because they are wanted there, there shouldn't be a problem.

If I didn't like it though, I wouldn't pull a Bin Laden. But there's be nothing I could about it.

SO have you read the Fatwah?

I have read it many times. We have military bases in HUNDREDS of countries. Why? Not EVERYONE wants us there. Do you have any proof that these people want us there? (Saudi Arabia?) You keep saying you know they want us there but everything I have seen and read FROM the actual people there (not part of any government) says they don't want us there. I do not want other countries to have a military presence in my country. I would do whatever it took to not let that happen as well. Obvioulsy MANY people throughout the History of the US feels the same because there are NONE.

[thatguyoverthere]

Alan1000, welcome to the board. Vietvet, you rock. Both of you, thanks for your service.

This is turning out to be a very interesting and thought provoking thread. Finally we are discussing WHY they hate us. Donkey summed it up:

Originally Posted by Donkey®

They hate us because we won't leave their countries alone.

It's the plain truth. Their country has Mecca on it, and they don't like America having troops on their holy land. They also see us as propping up corrupt monarchies, and they don't like that either. They've tried to tell us, but there's never been a serious, large scale effort, by the military or the media, to understand why they are attacking us.

That sets the stage for people who benefit from the war and having Americans divided to charaterize the attackers motives as irrational hatred of freedom.

Originally Posted by Vietvet

Bushco is not grounded in the real world. They are engaged in a fantasy world of "good guys and bad guys."

That's exactly the problem with them and their supporters. It's all John Wayne and "with God on our side." Empty headed and simplistic. To them, every war America gets involved in is a righteous war, simply by the virtue that we're in it.

At least, that's the way it looks to me.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by thatguyoverthere

It's the plain truth. Their country has Mecca on it, and they don't like America having troops on their holy land. They also see us as propping up corrupt monarchies, and they don't like that either. They've tried to tell us, but there's never been a serious, large scale effort, by the military or the media, to understand why they are attacking us.

You mean, they won't accept our puppet governments we have "liberated" them with? We didn't have this problem in Asia!

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

They have labeled everything else that opposes that as "cut and run". Democrats are not running around giving speaches that say "we must cut and run, it is in our best interests".

No Kidding!

We spin what they say and they spin what we say. It is that simple.

[alan1000]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

You mean, they won't accept our puppet governments we have "liberated" them with? We didn't have this problem in Asia!

ROFL