Originally posted by KidRock
I am not the media. I cant wait to see how they defend everything he does, no matter how horrible it is.And even more so shows like The Daily Show and Colbert Report and Bill Maher..granted they arent real news shows it will be interesting to see what material they use.
The Daily Show has been mocking out Obama plenty.
Originally posted by inimalistI'm not sure, but there was still the occasional bombing and missle strikes, that I know.
toucheyou get what I mean though, correct?
(though, I think they were in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, were there actual American bases in Iraq pre-2003?)
And yeah, I get what you mean. I think Obama will end the war, though. Just not return the troops incase Saddam really did have a weapon or something.
Originally posted by lord xyz
I'm not sure, but there was still the occasional bombing and missle strikes, that I know.And yeah, I get what you mean. I think Obama will end the war, though. Just not return the troops incase Saddam really did have a weapon or something.
at the very least he has said he has no intentions of returning the defense contractors
Originally posted by inimalist
even though Barak has promised more forces for Afghanistan...especially in light of British military reports of the Taliban being unbeatable with military power
I was referring specifically to your comment about the withdrawal from Iraq.
Afghan is an entirely different issue; the issue America should have put it's resources into, since that's where Osama is supposed to be.
Originally posted by Robtard
I was referring specifically to your comment about the withdrawal from Iraq.Afghan is an entirely different issue; the issue America should have put it's resources into, since that's where Osama is supposed to be.
no, I got what you were saying, I just though it odd that you alluded to Afghanistan in order to make a point about Iraq.
I don't think America's military resources are well spent in Afghanistan, much for the exact reasons you used Afghanistan as an allusion previously. You can't bomb Al Qaeda into submission, I don't even believe, personally, that the capture and killing of Bin Ladin would be much more than a symbolic victory at this point. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib (Morocco to Egypt/Jordan, though the group is stationed in Morocco/Tunisia) is very dangerous right now, and invading Tunisia is probably out of the question.
They should take the money they spend on one armed drone and teach 50 people to speak Pashtun.
lol, this turned into a rant, I can't imagine you are in favor of a "surge" in Afghanistan
Originally posted by inimalist
no, I got what you were saying, I just though it odd that you alluded to Afghanistan in order to make a point about Iraq.I don't think America's military resources are well spent in Afghanistan, much for the exact reasons you used Afghanistan as an allusion previously. You can't bomb Al Qaeda into submission, I don't even believe, personally, that the capture and killing of Bin Ladin would be much more than a symbolic victory at this point. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib (Morocco to Egypt/Jordan, though the group is stationed in Morocco/Tunisia) is very dangerous right now, and invading Tunisia is probably out of the question.
They should take the money they spend on one armed drone and teach 50 people to speak Pashtun.
lol, this turned into a rant, I can't imagine you are in favor of a "surge" in Afghanistan
Well, the Russians had a long drawn out war of attrition in Afgahn, similar to what America has now in Iraq.
But let's face it, if America was attacking as a means to kill those responsible for 9/11, Afghan should have been the operation zone and I'm not talking about thousands and thousands of soldiers. Small tactical groups, with air support when needed. For a fraction of the price America has spent in Iraq, Al Qaeda could have been rendered toothless in Afghan and sent a message to ther would be terrorist groups that targeted retaliation would be the outcome of any further terrorist attack on the U.S.
Well, like you said, killing Osama now would just be a gesture, but I'd be happy for it to be done under Obama or McCain.
Originally posted by Robtard
Well, the Russians had a long drawn out war of attrition in Afgahn, similar to what America has now in Iraq.But let's face it, if America was attacking as a means to kill those responsible for 9/11, Afghan should have been the operation zone and I'm not talking about thousands and thousands of soldiers. Small tactical groups, with air support when needed. For a fraction of the price America has spent in Iraq, Al Qaeda could have been rendered toothless in Afghan and sent a message to ther would be terrorist groups that targeted retaliation would be the outcome of any further terrorist attack on the U.S.
Well, like you said, killing Osama now would just be a gesture, but I'd be happy for it to be done under Obama or McCain.
we agree 🙂
Well to quote Obama's campaign, "a responsible end to the war" which is much softer language than he was using during the primaries.
If he does win I don't expect any real changes, simply giving one party a majority will not change anything, in fact if either party winds up with a major majority there will be even less incentive for change.
Originally posted by KidRock
He also said he would attack inside Iran.But he is no war monger..he told me so.
It's nice to parse what Obama says and imply something faulty.
He said he'd have no problem fighting Iran if they proved a valid threat to America, he also said he would open up talks with Iran as a means to avoid a war; the Right called him a pussy terrorist appeaser for that.