Tuesday, 8/31/10, Public Square

Tonight President Obama addresses Americans about pulling combat troops out of Iraq.  It was a time table set by his predecessor, but never mind that, since the world began on January 20, 2009, it is his responsibility.  I agree.  President Obama is the commander in chief and this ultimately is his decision and his responsibility.

Are the costs of war finally ‘on the books?’  Do we actually know what is being spent, where, how…?  Is the Military Industrial Machine still making huge profits at the expense of our soldiers and every American?

My opinion, shared by some, is that we should have never been in Iraq, and that the world is a less safe place since America invaded.

I’ll listen tonight, will you?

fnord

Advertisements

56 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

56 responses to “Tuesday, 8/31/10, Public Square

  1. http://www.collegehumor.com/article:1808737

    OK, it may be that the above is only fall on the floor, coffee spurting out of my nose all over the monitor funny to me. It is, however, true. The only problem is that there are at least 3 more types of parents that aren’t profiled. I think my wife and I met a minimum of two examples of each when our daughters moved into their residence halls at their respective alma mater. What a hoot!

  2. tosmarttobegop

    To be honest Fnord I more then likely will not watch pretty much I do not expect he will say anything I believe would be important. The question whether we should have invaded or should have been there is more or less mute and one that will be debated to no end.

    The correct answer would depend on where or not it could be proven that the intent was in honest believe though wrong in that believe. Or that it was to fulfill an agenda that was not truly in the best interests of the United States.

  3. http://www.slate.com/id/2265515/pagenum/all/#p2

    This is worth thinking about, whether one agrees with Mr. Hitchens or not. I believe he’s more accurate in his assessment than not, but each should make her/his own determination.

    • I already mentioned I am reading the book titled, “The Help.” I lived through the 60s which is the time period this book is set. I didn’t live in the south and I am white. I thought I knew what that world at that time was like before the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I really thought I knew. I didn’t.

      Men can say they know and understand issues involving women’s rights. Maybe they do on an intellectual level, but like I didn’t actually know about what it was like for black people until I read it from the perspective of black women telling their stories, neither is it possible for a man to completely understand women’s rights.

      Yes, our future, we white people, is as a minority. And, I don’t think we have a clue!

    • It doesn’t have to be a struggle, but I fear it will be. People like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin whip up frenzy. Look at those who are convinced all Muslims are out to kill us. Look at the immigration issue and the hate that is at frenzy levels.

      No, it doesn’t have to be a struggle, we could actually have learned lessons from our past. We could actually understand that humans (all humans) deserve dignity.

      But the lessons haven’t been learned.

  4. President Obama could say only events of the future unknown to us now will show what is in store for Iraq. He could tell us we weren’t asked to interfere, and it isn’t our responsibility to decide the future of other countries. He could honestly state that our military is less prepared to protect America today because of our involvement in two wars over the last 9+ years. He could tell us how much those wars have actually cost in lives and resources.

    But, he won’t.

    I have no idea what kind of ‘spin’ will be put on the war and the fact that combat missions have ceased, that we’re leaving lots and lots of soldiers still in country… It will be spin, I just don’t know what it will sound like. It will tell us how great our troops are, how great America is, how bright our future is… It’ll be a bunch of crap.

  5. tosmarttobegop

    I am not truly wanting to make this a all day thing. When ITOLDYOUSO said he would check out the links.

    But was busy and it would take time to respond to them. I understand that and to truly come to understand what the Neo-Conservatives are about take a good deal of time.

    In fact it takes a great deal of time to finally be convinced of the true impact of them.

    It sounds so much like any conspiracy theory, but like was pointed out to me once.
    It is not a conspiracy if they are doing it in plain sight.

    This is the first of a documentary, it explain two major group involved in today’s news and conflict.
    Now I was not informed of these videos till after I had already been researching on the topic of the Neo-Conservatives. So when I watched them I knew that what was being said was factual.

  6. fnord,

    I’ll not be listening nor watching, continuing a personal tradition begun during the Reagan years.

    With all respect to the President, he won’t say anything that will affect my opinion that the Iraq invasion was not in the best interests of the U.S. nor its allies. I say this to not denigrate the service of the members of the military, but in sadness generated by the meaningless sacrifices that they, and their families, have made while performing their duty, and, in many cases, will continue to make as they grapple with PTSD, as an example.

    If there was any legitimate justification for the misadventure, I have failed to recognize it. Unlike Afghanistan, there was nothing Iraq and its government did (that has been clearly documented in a convincing way) that had anything to do with September 11, 2001. Speaking of Afghanistan, the mission there was doomed to failure, imho, once the drum started beating for the Iraq invasion. I truly believe there was a small window of opportunity in Afghanistan to stabilize that area, one which long ago slammed shut.

    Meanwhile, the mid-East is less stable, and Iran presents (again, imho) an ever-growing threat to stability in that area, one which had been counter-balanced by Sadam and his henchmen. I’ve no belief the current Iraqi government will be effective in that regard. No, Iran should not be the subject of any military action by the U.S. and its allies at present; there is always the potential this action will become needed in the future, but we (the U.S.) cannot afford to do it alone, nor to fund any actions by Israel, our proxy.

  7. When the Republicans take back the majority they can once again begin banging the drum of war and military superiority. We are weaker as a result of the senseless wars fought over the last decade, Iran is stronger because we helped them gain strength, and I’m convinced with Republican majorities we’ll be back waging wars of choice.

  8. These laws aren’t even old, and although the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (NOT even 50 years ago!) made these practices illegal, how many attitudes still practice these?

    ——————-

    Nurses No person or corporation shall require any white female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or private, in which negro men are placed. Alabama

    Buses All passenger stations in this state operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races. Alabama

    Railroads The conductor of each passenger train is authorized and required to assign each passenger to the car or the division of the car, when it is divided by a partition, designated for the race to which such passenger belongs. Alabama

    Restaurants It shall be unlawful to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment. Alabama

    Pool and Billiard Rooms It shall be unlawful for a negro and white person to play together or in company with each other at any game of pool or billiards. Alabama

    Toilet Facilities, Male Every employer of white or negro males shall provide for such white or negro males reasonably accessible and separate toilet facilities. Alabama

    Intermarriage The marriage of a person of Caucasian blood with a Negro, Mongolian, Malay, or Hindu shall be null and void. Arizona

    Intermarriage All marriages between a white person and a negro, or between a white person and a person of negro descent to the fourth generation inclusive, are hereby forever prohibited. Florida

    Education The schools for white children and the schools for negro children shall be conducted separately. Florida

    Juvenile Delinquents There shall be separate buildings, not nearer than one fourth mile to each other, one for white boys and one for negro boys. White boys and negro boys shall not, in any manner, be associated together or worked together. Florida

    • wicked

      I watched this yesterday and don’t think I can watch again.

      Many of us here were around when these things happened. I didn’t know there was segregation, until integration became the topic of politicians and news shows. (I do remember asking my dad why ‘colored’ people sat in the back of the bus, so I was aware of something.) I believed the black kids went to the schools they went to because the schools were in the areas where they lived. The first time I remember being around black kids was at Girl Scout camp when I’d turned 11. They were nice girls, two of them, and they stayed in a tent together next to ours. I assumed they chose to tent together. That was 1962. (My parents were democrats. Liberals. I wasn’t taught racism.)

      But later I learned there was a problem. In my junior year in high school, the cheerleaders came up to Wichita one evening–I think to attend something at WSU–and ended up at the police station because a brick was thrown through their car window. Two years later (1969), I was involved in race riots in college in Pittsburg, KS.

      We haven’t come far enough since the Civil Rights Act, but we have advanced some. It just seems lately that racism is once again rearing its ugly head, and I hear echoes of the ’50s and ’60s.

      And for what it’s worth, the video brought tears to my eyes.

      • Anyone capable of watching that video and not feeling profoundly sad has no heart.

        Today there are new targets for the hate and bigotry — Muslims, the GLBT community, and poor people are among them. Maybe we haven’t come far enough is the under statement of the year.

  9. indypendent

    I watched the History Channel last night. They had a documentary about the Kl Klux Klan. I thought I knew most of the history about that group but I learned alot from this show.

    For instance, to make their message more palatable – they used the White Christian churches to further their membership. Some preachers even went so far as to forward the money from their parishioners to the KKK because some of these self-professing Christians did not want their names to be associated with the KKK but they thought the KKK mission and message was okay.

    That is why the Christian cross was used as their symbol

    So when I hear these current Conservative Christians invoke their god and spew their hatred – is it really any different than the KKK doing their hatred through the White Christian churches?

    So, let’s not think for a moment that Christianity has not had their share (and then some) of those radical haters who will stop at nothing to spread their hate and claim their superiority over all others they find unacceptable.,

    • indypendent

      BTW – the KKK were known for their religious terrorism against the Jews, Catholics and Mormons.

      The KKK is most known for their terrorizing and murder of blacks but their hate was not limited to only black people.

      So when Christians insist that their religion does not condone murder – this is one example where murder was condoned in the name of their Christian God by alot of Christians – not just a few radical Islamic terrorists that carried out 9/11.

  10. tosmarttobegop

    My grandmother told me a story of the Klan when she was younger.
    A husband had beaten his wife almost to death and the Klan chased him down and horse whipped him to a bloody pulp. The view of the Klan in her days was not of one that it is today.

    To her generation they were the social safeguards of the time. She said she had never heard of them lynching anyone.

    • wicked

      Good point, tstb. In fact, anyone who’s watched Gone With the Wind might remember a scene that shows the KKK in its earliest years.

      After the war was over, the carpetbaggers came down from the north and stirred up the former slaves, giving them whiskey and telling them they could do anything. There was a lot of lawlessness during that time, and good men took the law into their own hands, usually to save a woman. That was the beginning of the KKK.

  11. Actually, President Obama did a good job on his speech tonight.

  12. tosmarttobegop

    This has such an profound impact on me, the look on that sweet and innocent girl after she pointed to the black doll for the one that looked most like her.

  13. tosmarttobegop

    I guess I should have listen to the speech judging from the comments on MSNBC.
    Kind of confusing as to what he did say?

    It is becoming another one of those “what he meant by it was…”

  14. He was eloquent. He was humble, he was appreciative. He didn’t say what we accomplished. How could he? If you actually come out and say that how do our troops who did exactly as asked feel about their service? He didn’t say what would happen now that this is over. How could he? Who knows that? We broke it and we didn’t / couldn’t fix it. He didn’t say that either. But it was an eloquent, kind, appreciative mark to end this. Whatever ‘this’ was and will become.

  15. The following is the text, as prepared for delivery, of President Obama’s address from the Oval Office on Tuesday night, provided by the White House:

    Good evening. Tonight, I’d like to talk to you about the end of our combat mission in Iraq, the ongoing security challenges we face, and the need to rebuild our nation here at home.

    I know this historic moment comes at a time of great uncertainty for many Americans. We have now been through nearly a decade of war. We have endured a long and painful recession. And sometimes in the midst of these storms, the future that we are trying to build for our nation — a future of lasting peace and long-term prosperity may seem beyond our reach.

    But this milestone should serve as a reminder to all Americans that the future is ours to shape if we move forward with confidence and commitment. It should also serve as a message to the world that the United States of America intends to sustain and strengthen our leadership in this young century.

    From this desk, seven and a half years ago, President Bush announced the beginning of military operations in Iraq. Much has changed since that night. A war to disarm a state became a fight against an insurgency. Terrorism and sectarian warfare threatened to tear Iraq apart. Thousands of Americans gave their lives; tens of thousands have been wounded. Our relations abroad were strained. Our unity at home was tested.

    These are the rough waters encountered during the course of one of America’s longest wars. Yet there has been one constant amidst those shifting tides. At every turn, America’s men and women in uniform have served with courage and resolve. As commander in chief, I am proud of their service. Like all Americans, I am awed by their sacrifice, and by the sacrifices of their families.

    The Americans who have served in Iraq completed every mission they were given. They defeated a regime that had terrorized its people. Together with Iraqis and coalition partners who made huge sacrifices of their own, our troops fought block by block to help Iraq seize the chance for a better future. They shifted tactics to protect the Iraqi people; trained Iraqi security forces; and took out terrorist leaders. Because of our troops and civilians — and because of the resilience of the Iraqi people — Iraq has the opportunity to embrace a new destiny, even though many challenges remain.

    So tonight, I am announcing that the American combat mission in Iraq has ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country.

    This was my pledge to the American people as a candidate for this office. Last February, I announced a plan that would bring our combat brigades out of Iraq, while redoubling our efforts to strengthen Iraq’s security forces and support its government and people. That is what we have done. We have removed nearly 100,000 U.S. troops from Iraq. We have closed or transferred hundreds of bases to the Iraqis. And we have moved millions of pieces of equipment out of Iraq.

    This completes a transition to Iraqi responsibility for their own security. U.S. troops pulled out of Iraq’s cities last summer, and Iraqi forces have moved into the lead with considerable skill and commitment to their fellow citizens. Even as Iraq continues to suffer terrorist attacks, security incidents have been near the lowest on record since the war began. And Iraqi forces have taken the fight to Al Qaeda, removing much of its leadership in Iraqi-led operations.

    This year also saw Iraq hold credible elections that drew a strong turnout. A caretaker administration is in place as Iraqis form a government based on the results of that election. Tonight, I encourage Iraq’s leaders to move forward with a sense of urgency to form an inclusive government that is just, representative, and accountable to the Iraqi people. And when that government is in place, there should be no doubt: the Iraqi people will have a strong partner in the United States. Our combat mission is ending, but our commitment to Iraq’s future is not.

    Going forward, a transitional force of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq with a different mission: advising and assisting Iraq’s security forces; supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counter terrorism missions; and protecting our civilians. Consistent with our agreement with the Iraqi government, all U.S. troops will leave by the end of next year. As our military draws down, our dedicated civilians — diplomats, aid workers, and advisers — are moving into the lead to support Iraq as it strengthens its government, resolves political disputes, resettles those displaced by war, and builds ties with the region and the world. And that is a message that Vice President Biden is delivering to the Iraqi people through his visit there today.

    This new approach reflects our long-term partnership with Iraq — one based upon mutual interests, and mutual respect. Of course, violence will not end with our combat mission. Extremists will continue to set off bombs, attack Iraqi civilians and try to spark sectarian strife. But ultimately, these terrorists will fail to achieve their goals. Iraqis are a proud people. They have rejected sectarian war, and they have no interest in endless destruction. They understand that, in the end, only Iraqis can resolve their differences and police their streets. Only Iraqis can build a democracy within their borders. What America can do, and will do, is provide support for the Iraqi people as both a friend and a partner.

    Ending this war is not only in Iraq’s interest — it is in our own. The United States has paid a huge price to put the future of Iraq in the hands of its people. We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home. We have persevered because of a belief we share with the Iraqi people — a belief that out of the ashes of war, a new beginning could be born in this cradle of civilization. Through this remarkable chapter in the history of the United States and Iraq, we have met our responsibility. Now, it is time to turn the page.

    As we do, I am mindful that the Iraq war has been a contentious issue at home. Here, too, it is time to turn the page. This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one could doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I have said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hope for Iraq’s future.

    The greatness of our democracy is grounded in our ability to move beyond our differences, and to learn from our experience as we confront the many challenges ahead. And no challenge is more essential to our security than our fight against Al Qaeda.

    Americans across the political spectrum supported the use of force against those who attacked us on 9/11. Now, as we approach our 10th year of combat in Afghanistan, there are those who are understandably asking tough questions about our mission there. But we must never lose sight of what’s at stake. As we speak, Al Qaeda continues to plot against us, and its leadership remains anchored in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan. We will disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda, while preventing Afghanistan from again serving as a base for terrorists. And because of our drawdown in Iraq, we are now able to apply the resources necessary to go on offense. In fact, over the last 19 months, nearly a dozen Al Qaeda leaders — and hundreds of Al Qaeda’s extremist allies — have been killed or captured around the world.

    Within Afghanistan, I have ordered the deployment of additional troops who — under the command of General David Petraeus — are fighting to break the Taliban’s momentum. As with the surge in Iraq, these forces will be in place for a limited time to provide space for the Afghans to build their capacity and secure their own future. But, as was the case in Iraq, we cannot do for Afghans what they must ultimately do for themselves. That’s why we are training Afghan security forces and supporting a political resolution to Afghanistan’s problems. And, next July, we will begin a transition to Afghan responsibility. The pace of our troop reductions will be determined by conditions on the ground, and our support for Afghanistan will endure. But make no mistake: this transition will begin — because open-ended war serves neither our interests nor the Afghan people’s.

    Indeed, one of the lessons of our effort in Iraq is that American influence around the world is not a function of military force alone. We must use all elements of our power — including our diplomacy, our economic strength, and the power of America’s example — to secure our interests and stand by our allies. And we must project a vision of the future that is based not just on our fears, but also on our hopes — a vision that recognizes the real dangers that exist around the world, but also the limitless possibility of our time.

    Today, old adversaries are at peace, and emerging democracies are potential partners. New markets for our goods stretch from Asia to the Americas. A new push for peace in the Middle East will begin here tomorrow. Billions of young people want to move beyond the shackles of poverty and conflict. As the leader of the free world, America will do more than just defeat on the battlefield those who offer hatred and destruction — we will also lead among those who are willing to work together to expand freedom and opportunity for all people.

    That effort must begin within our own borders. Throughout our history, America has been willing to bear the burden of promoting liberty and human dignity overseas, understanding its link to our own liberty and security. But we have also understood that our nation’s strength and influence abroad must be firmly anchored in our prosperity at home. And the bedrock of that prosperity must be a growing middle class.

    Unfortunately, over the last decade, we have not done what is necessary to shore up the foundation of our own prosperity. We have spent over a trillion dollars at war, often financed by borrowing from overseas. This, in turn, has shortchanged investments in our own people, and contributed to record deficits. For too long, we have put off tough decisions on everything from our manufacturing base to our energy policy to education reform. As a result, too many middle class families find themselves working harder for less, while our nation’s long-term competitiveness is put at risk.

    And so at this moment, as we wind down the war in Iraq, we must tackle those challenges at home with as much energy, and grit, and sense of common purpose as our men and women in uniform who have served abroad. They have met every test that they faced. Now, it is our turn. Now, it is our responsibility to honor them by coming together, all of us, and working to secure the dream that so many generations have fought for — the dream that a better life awaits anyone who is willing to work for it and reach for it.

    Our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work. To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy. We must jump-start industries that create jobs, and end our dependence on foreign oil. We must unleash the innovation that allows new products to roll off our assembly lines, and nurture the ideas that spring from our entrepreneurs. This will be difficult. But in the days to come, it must be our central mission as a people, and my central responsibility as president.

    Part of that responsibility is making sure that we honor our commitments to those who have served our country with such valor. As long as I am president, we will maintain the finest fighting force that the world has ever known, and do whatever it takes to serve our veterans as well as they have served us. This is a sacred trust. That is why we have already made one of the largest increases in funding for veterans in decades. We are treating the signature wounds of today’s wars post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury, while providing the health care and benefits that all of our veterans have earned. And we are funding a post-9/11 G.I. bill that helps our veterans and their families pursue the dream of a college education. Just as the G.I. Bill helped those who fought World War II — including my grandfather — become the backbone of our middle class, so today’s servicemen and women must have the chance to apply their gifts to expand the American economy. Because part of ending a war responsibly is standing by those who have fought it.

    Two weeks ago, America’s final combat brigade in Iraq — the Army’s Fourth Stryker Brigade — journeyed home in the predawn darkness. Thousands of soldiers and hundreds of vehicles made the trip from Baghdad, the last of them passing into Kuwait in the early morning hours. Over seven years before, American troops and coalition partners had fought their way across similar highways, but this time no shots were fired. It was just a convoy of brave Americans, making their way home.

    Of course, the soldiers left much behind. Some were teenagers when the war began. Many have served multiple tours of duty, far from their families who bore a heroic burden of their own, enduring the absence of a husband’s embrace or a mother’s kiss. Most painfully, since the war began 55 members of the Fourth Stryker Brigade made the ultimate sacrifice — part of over 4,400 Americans who have given their lives in Iraq. As one staff sergeant said, “I know that to my brothers in arms who fought and died, this day would probably mean a lot.”

    Those Americans gave their lives for the values that have lived in the hearts of our people for over two centuries. Along with nearly 1.5 million Americans who have served in Iraq, they fought in a faraway place for people they never knew. They stared into the darkest of human creations — war — and helped the Iraqi people seek the light of peace.

    In an age without surrender ceremonies, we must earn victory through the success of our partners and the strength of our own nation. Every American who serves joins an unbroken line of heroes that stretches from Lexington to Gettysburg; from Iwo Jima to Inchon; from Khe Sanh to Kandahar — Americans who have fought to see that the lives of our children are better than our own. Our troops are the steel in our ship of state. And though our nation may be traveling through rough waters, they give us confidence that our course is true, and that beyond the predawn darkness, better days lie ahead.

    Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America, and all who serve her.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/01/world/01obama-text.html?_r=1

    • itolduso

      Now that the “page is turned” perhaps the Obama administration will take responsibility for what happens from this point on? Not just credit for what was previously scheduled and agreed to by the Previous administration. Perhaps.

      • He took no credit in his speech last night. There is certainly nothing to take credit for other than the combat troops are home. There are still too many troops there, there should have never been any there. In his speech last night he didn’t place blame, and he didn’t place credit, he simply said that is done.

  16. The great difference I see now vs Vietnam is that we are united in support of our troops. They did as asked. Maybe someday we can equate the wars in the two countries in other and better ways. Maybe someday we can say Iraq is stable. I hope.

  17. itolduso

    Maybe someday we can say Iraq is stable. I hope.

    I hope, but am doubtful

  18. itolduso

    Actually, the combat troops are not home. There are thousands there. Only the name of their mission has changed. They will now officially be doing what they have been doing for months—training, backing up Iraqui forces, and security for our own people..such as the State Department. There are several combat brigades there, just their name has changed. Not their equipment, not their training, not anything except for their name.
    But no matter. I am glad to see as many come out of that hellhole as soon as possible. Huray for Obama.

    • indypendent

      Actually, all troops are combat trained – you’re right there. You’re right also that the mission has changed – which is why the big deal about the combat troops are home.

      But wasn’t this withdrawal something that Bush and his loyal lapdogs should be taking credit for? After all, this withdrawal was negotiated with the Iraqis – if I am not mistaken.

      I think it was negotiated about the time that the the Iraqi Prime Minister al Malaki ran over to Iran to become BFF’s with their little president.

      So the future of Iraq is in THEIR hands – not ours. No matter how much training or extra billions of dollars the US throws into that sandbox – the future is STILL in the hands of Islamists.

      And that is one thing we will NEVER change.

      • indypendent

        One thing that Obama could have said last night was that if the country had listened to him and others like him – we would have NEVER invaded Iraq and wasted trillions of dollars.

        But, then, all those lovely war profits would have not been made by those select ‘right’ few private contractors.

        And any self-respecting ‘honorable’ Republican could not stand for that – could they?

  19. indypendent

    As for the hellhole – do you really think Iraq is the only one?

    From the banging of the war drums on the Republican side of the aisle – I see several hellholes in our future.

    I just wonder – whose taxes are going to be raised to pay for these new wars?

    Oh yeah – that’s right – Republicans have promised to never raise taxes. In fact, they promised to lower them.

    I guess it is going to be the Chinese credit card again.

  20. itolduso

    Actually, all troops are combat trained

    Actually, these are combat brigades. Not troops that are combat trained. Only their name has changed.

    “So the future of Iraq is in THEIR hands – not ours. No matter how much training or extra billions of dollars the US throws into that sandbox – the future is STILL in the hands of Islamists.

    And that is one thing we will NEVER change.”

    I agree. As it always has been, after the first election held many years ago.

  21. itolduso

    As for the hellhole – do you really think Iraq is the only one?

    No I do not. If anything, Afganistan is an even bigger hellhole, and a shithole of a country to boot.

    “From the banging of the war drums on the Republican side of the aisle ”

    Okay, I will bite. Which Republicans are banging the war drums, and to which endeavor are they striving?

    “I guess it is going to be the Chinese credit card again”

    Yep, same one we are using now. Sooner or later, that credit card is going to be maxed out, no matter who is using it, or for what.

    • indypendent

      Startign with John McCain in the presidential campaign – Iran and then on to North Korea.

      Newt Gingrich brought this same issue up just a few weeks ago.

      Republicans want to finish what GWB started against the axis of evil.

      If you don’t hear those war drums banging then perhaps you need to take off those Reagan-colored glasses and headphones.

      As for giving Bush (the previous CIC) credit – when will Bush and Gang take responsibility for not providing our soldiers adequate body armor?

      But we’ve been down this road before and as I said before – we will need to agree to disagree when it comes to how wise and good a CIC George W.Bush was.

  22. itolduso

    But, then, all those lovely war profits would have not been made by those select ‘right’ few private contractors.

    And any self-respecting ‘honorable’ Republican could not stand for that – could they?

    That’s right, no “honorable” Republican could have supported the invasion of Iraq for any other reason than making sure the war profits went to the “right” companies. YOU BET!!!!

    • itolduso

      By the way, just so you know, I did not support the invasion of Iraq. I don;t believe in preemptive strikes in general

      • indypendent

        In general? But in certain cases it is okay?

        That’s exactly the same logic Bush and Gang used in invading Iraq.

  23. indypendent

    That’s right, no “honorable” Republican could have supported the invasion of Iraq for any other reason than making sure the war profits went to the “right” companies. YOU BET!!!!

    Maybe I am reading this wrong – but it seems you’re saying going to war for war profits is okay – as long as the ‘right’ companies profit.

    And who determines the ‘right’ companies? Only those with the ‘right’ God?

    • itolduso

      Sorry, it was sarcasm. I should have noted such. My point was that there were many Republicans who believed in the Iraq war, and no profit motive was involved.

      I didn;t make the comment about the “right companies” someone else did. Sorry it wasn;t clear.

  24. indypendent

    I refuse to get into another tit for tat conversation about the Iraq War.

    I have stated before – we need to agree to disagree about this issue.

    If you cannot do that, then so be it.

    But no one who has had loved ones die or come back injured from Iraq should be dismissed simply because they are not willing to bow down and worship Bush and Gang for what they did in Iraq.

    And now they want credit for it?

    • itolduso

      Sorry I don;t know what you are talking about. I was against the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. I haven;t dismissed anyone, nor have I called for the worshipping of Bush and Gang in any way. And I don’t know if they want credit for ending it or not. THe timetable was established by Bush and the Iraqi government. Obama deserves some credit for following the game plan, but it is a stretch to say that he was responsible for the ending of the so called Combat Mission in Iraq. Just my opinion

  25. 6176746f6c6c65

    I don’t believe in preemptive strikes “in general” either. However, the potential for delivering one should not be taken off the table. Someone (cannot recall) once said that war was the result of the failure of diplomacy. That’s why it needs to be “on the table”, as a reminder of the potential horrible consequences of failing to arrive at a diplomatic resolution.

    Given the lack of “nation state” actors in what appears to me to be the way armed conflicts of the 21st Century will be forthcoming, the question becomes whether there is a place for traditional diplomacy any more. I like to think there is, but as time goes by, I increasingly doubt it.

    • itolduso

      I understand your viewpoint. However, I must disagree. My diplomatic viewpoint to nation states would be…

      “Attack the US, and disappear as a country”

      I think that there is still a huge potential, currently being disregarded for the most part, to be involved in nation-state conflict. Both Russia and China are becoming increasingly aggressive, and increasingly more potent. China would concern me more than Russia, but I think the possiblity is there. WHile we must prepare militarily for hostilites in the nontradtional type of conflict, we cannot ignore the possibility of the other.

      Man cannot live with man. He can barely live with woman. History is replete with examples, in nearly all societies, ages, religions, etc etc etc etc

      • To me, the major danger posed by the Chinese is economic. No need to attack militarily, if foreclosure is available.

        Perhaps a bit of a Pollyanna, but it seems to me the Russians, while more aggressive in tone and action, are not becoming more potent militarily. Truly, Russia is taking advantage of the U.S. and its weakened state due primarily to the Iraqi misadventure and the strain the same placed upon the U.S. internationally, but I don’t know this necessarily equates an increased potency.

        Yes, nation-state conflict cannot be ignored, but I fear in some circles, it is elevated in importance over the more realistic potential for nontraditional conflicts. The former brings shiny new “toys”; the latter is a grimy, time consuming and often perceived as unsuccessful undertaking, fought better with “antiquated” armaments than the latest air superiority fighter, e.g.

      • wicked

        “Man cannot live with man. He can barely live with woman.”

        Okay, so since man can’t seem to get along with anyone, it’s time for woman to take over.

        Come on, ladies!! And for all of those women who have not yet learned to think for themselves, you stay on the other side of the gender line, ‘k?

        Just pullin’ your chain, itolduso. 😉

  26. itolduso

    I know you are. BUT I thought women were already in charge! Who do you think pushes the man’s buttons? WOMEN!!

    And I never knew how mean girls/women could be to each other until I had daughters, and now granddaughters. MY GOD! 🙂

    • wicked

      Sometimes in charge, sometimes not. It depends, especially in a marriage.

      Yes, women can be vicious, although, as a rule, they aren’t as physical as men with their anger. I say ‘as a rule’ because I have 4 daughters, and I’ve seen them attempt to beat the crap out of each other.

      • itolduso

        Yeah, for the most part you are right about the physical part, but man, they can cut to another’s soul like nobody I’ve ever seen. Guys generally get mad, get physical, get over it. Gals, just get mad, get nasty in other ways, and keep it going longer it seems to me. That goes primarily for fights with other girls/women. Guys punch in the nose….Gals take out the verbal knife and cut the hearts out of their percieved enemies.

      • You’ve seen absolutely nothing until you watch us if our children need protection.

        Sometimes, political issues fall in this category.

  27. indypendent

    To date, I have not heard of one Republican calling Newt out on this – so I assume from their silence they agree with him?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/30/newt-gingrich-suggests-at_n_665063.html

    • indypendent

      And not only is their silence deafening – when one looks at the past actions of these lockstepping Republicans that applauded the invasion of Iraq – is the possible invasion of Iran and North Korea really that much of a stretch to expect from this group?

      Especially when this same group has now found God and is in the sandbox yelling that their God can beat up the Muslim God.

    • itolduso

      He is free to have his opinion. I really don;t care what it is. He’s not, as yet, running for office. He is just running his mouth.

  28. indypendent

    Interesting information on group Newt Gingrich was speaking to about the need to invade Iran and North Korea.

    This is the group and please note – it is a NeoConservative group.

    Now tell me again how Neocons are not a threat?

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute