Mosul has fallen

[JeremiahJohnson]

Can I pay for this with my Visa or Mastercard?

These occupations are exactly how we will be defeated. In case anyone hasn't noticed, we're $17 trillion in debt. How do we continue to pay for this and stay afloat?

Exactly why "interests" that require intervention by US forces should be weighed heavily. In My Humble Opinion, there was a point made much earlier in this thread I'd like to agree with and that is the way in which the US wages war. Occupations are cost prohibitive and should be extremely high on the list before taken on by the tax payers. So, the alternative is to protect against threats without occupation in the traditional sense. For those who would murder Americans, the US must stiffen it's constitution for returning the favor. Not all missions can be accomplished with drones and smart bombs or anything from the air. Sometimes what one needs is a highly trained group of assassins to return a US eye-for-an-eye. Most Americans disagree with that concept. The alternative is occupation...or what we see now when a giant vacuum is left.

 

[hornadylnl]

Spreading democracy...

While we continually expand the power of the state here.

 

[Henry]

While we continually expand the power of the state here.

Here, there, and everywhere.

 

[BogWalker]

The security forces had the advantage in number, equipment, training, and intelligence. Yet they lost, and many of them went into full retreat without even fighting. Why?

Either 1. they are sympathetic to the terrorists, or 2. they are too chicken**** to fight for the freedom. Anyone who will not fight for their own freedom doesn't deserve to have others do it for them.

I'd do a full, immediate withdrawal. Tell the Taliban if they stay off of our soil we stay off of theirs. The people of Iraq have brought this upon themselves with their cowardice. Let them reap what they've sown. I'm fed up with trying to help them as they don't want our help.

Sure, we could easily **** kick the Taliban out of Iraq again. Then as soon as we leave they'll march right back in and the Iraqi people will do nothing but beg for our help once more.

Of course the Taliban being as they are you could never make an agreement with them; they'll always break it. You can't beat them, but you can't ignore them. I really don't know what to do about them.

Crazy idea. Let the terrorists win and form their own government. Then, when their leadership and membership is in the open after solidifying their power, bombing raid on government facilities, multiple assassinations, and mass propaganda campaign for the people to rise up while the oppressors are down. It's a lot easier to destroy a cohesive government than a guerilla fighting organization.

 

[85s10]

This stuff is really disturbing, all those soldiers sacrificing and giving every thing that you'd expect from USA blood and guts effort and now for naught.

 

[rugertoter]

If we went for the oil we did a pretty **** poor job of it, as the price has done nothing but get more expensive. I wish we would have just taken the damn oil, at least we would have gotten something out of all of this. Nation building is a load of horse****, if they don't want our help then let's stop trying to give it to them.

^^^THIS^^^!

 

[85s10]

Another thought, militant islam is kinda like communism- it is just spreading like a disease that cannot be stopped. Only was is for the "free" world to collectively declare a world war on this action and completely annihilate those people responsible (like WWII)-but ain't gonna happen with the present muslim loving leadership we have now.

 

[hornadylnl]

I have a proposal. All future wars will be brought to a public vote. Anyone who votes yes is automatically drafted for the duration of the occupation.

Waving your flag and involuntarily contributing a few hundred dollars to the war effort through taxes doesn't win wars.

 

[Destro]

Anyone who votes yes is automatically drafted for the duration of the occupation.

not even a chance to volunteer?

 

[Destro]

The security forces had the advantage in number, equipment, training, and intelligence. Yet they lost, and many of them went into full retreat without even fighting. Why?

Either 1. they are sympathetic to the terrorists, or 2. they are too chicken**** to fight for the freedom. Anyone who will not fight for their own freedom doesn't deserve to have others do it for them.

I'd do a full, immediate withdrawal. Tell the Taliban if they stay off of our soil we stay off of theirs. The people of Iraq have brought this upon themselves with their cowardice. Let them reap what they've sown. I'm fed up with trying to help them as they don't want our help.

Sure, we could easily **** kick the Taliban out of Iraq again. Then as soon as we leave they'll march right back in and the Iraqi people will do nothing but beg for our help once more.

Of course the Taliban being as they are you could never make an agreement with them; they'll always break it. You can't beat them, but you can't ignore them. I really don't know what to do about them.

Crazy idea. Let the terrorists win and form their own government. Then, when their leadership and membership is in the open after solidifying their power, bombing raid on government facilities, multiple assassinations, and mass propaganda campaign for the people to rise up while the oppressors are down. It's a lot easier to destroy a cohesive government than a guerilla fighting organization.

whoa....since when is the Taliban in Iraq?

 

[KG1]

I have a proposal. All future wars will be brought to a public vote. Anyone who votes yes is automatically drafted for the duration of the occupation.

Waving your flag and involuntarily contributing a few hundred dollars to the war effort through taxes doesn't win wars.

Thank you for serving in Bosnia.

 

[BogWalker]

whoa....since when is the Taliban in Iraq?

Eh, I'll admit I'm not so up and up on who is operating where. The flavor of the month is ISIS, right? Probably should have put them in the post. I'm just used to using Taliban. I imagine they're connected, as a group like this doesn't just materialize out of thin air. The blanket term "Islamic terrorist" would really be sufficient as they tend to operate with similar goals and methods.

 

[brotherbill3]

This thread is funny. I'd stay out but I'd like to point two things out to those discussing things:

1) Do you realize how long have we been fighting this 'enemy' - that being islamic 'terrorists' ?
(hint: they were called something different when we first started ... they worked 'somewhat similarly too)

2) It seems to me that to spread our form of government to others,
would require the receiving people have a similar belief in liberty with similar background and understanding of its repsonsiblities and such;
The great experiment of America started from a seeminly 'unique' set of conditions ... and however noble we wish to be
spreading it is not that easy to those who have no concept of its basic principles
... look at how it fails here: ask a few people what form of goverment we have or how it is intented to involve them:
(HINT: ... including what it is said we're spreading in this very thread ...)

OK enough. later yo you yous or something like that.

 

[ModernGunner]

^^ 1) Yes. Roughly 13 centuries. They were then known as the "Moors". ^^

So, we had Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (current leader of ISIS / ISIL) IN custody in Iraq, and he was turned loose?

Good thinking.

I'm guessing most folks STILL have no clue who they're dealing with.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Or are you like Kirk and let somebody else shed their blood for your globalist desires?

Destroying our enemies is not a "globalist desire". It is about defending the country and there is nothing to feel guilty about having a national policy that does so.

No, if only we had a President who was interested in destroying our enemies.

 

[PistolBob]

Says someone who's probably never left the US. They may be having issues right now, but the ME is actually a rather nice place when it's not under threat from extremists.

Now that's hilarious.

 

[hornadylnl]

Destroying our enemies is not a "globalist desire". It is about defending the country and there is nothing to feel guilty about having a national policy that does so.

No, if only we had a President who was interested in destroying our enemies.

Great. Now how are you contributing to the cause? Interpretive dance?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Dear God, is every f**king thread about me? Every one? LOL.

I live rent free on INGO.

1. Obama screws the dog (instead of eating it), INGO makes it out that I am screwing up the Middle East.

2. ???

3. Profit.

I am involved in a relationship, horn. Get over it.

So, do you imagine me as Daniel Craig double naught spy then? He is a sexy beast much like me. Geezus, they are possessed.

 

[hornadylnl]

Dear God, is every f**king thread about me? Every one? LOL.

I live rent free on INGO.

1. Obama screws the dog (instead of eating it), INGO makes it out that I am screwing up the Middle East.

2. ???

3. Profit.

I am involved in a relationship, horn. Get over it.

So, do you imagine me as Daniel Craig double naught spy then? He is a sexy beast much like me. Geezus, they are possessed.

So bloviating is it. Thank you. Bash Obama while willing to do nothing yourself.

 

[KG1]

So bloviating is it. Thank you. Bash Obama while willing to do nothing yourself.

Why should he do anything? You don't like his ideas anyway.