Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In other words, Romney is admitting he's a globalist and if he is elected we'll have more of the same. We should forget about the stupid "global economy" which has failed miserably; take our sovereignty back and go back to the basics we should have stuck to that our Founding Fathers laid out for us in the Constitution. We have too many of our own problems that we've shown we haven't t been able to solve without taking on the world's problems too.
You should have listened to the speech before commenting. That is not what he said at all.
So 9/11 happens, and everyone gets scared and next thing you know we attack Iraq ...
Iraq never attacked us ... They didn't even have any "WMD's" ... !
What did america get out of fighting that war? What did we accomplish for the good of the Iraqi people? Are they safer now than before we attacked them? Is their economy better than it was before we attacked them?
Hmm ...
lets see, today there were 8 people killed in Iraq, due to ongoing unrest in the region that is the direct product of the american invasion after 9/11. 5 by gunfire and IED's in separate incidents ... 2 (a woman and a child) by IED ... And 1 by AED. And over 112,419 civilian casualties since the start of the war.
They got an embassy larger than the Vatican with a lot of employees, courtesy of the American taxpayer. Sorry...I just had to throw that in. If it was about 9/11, we should have been in Saudi Arabia.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7
I think if you talk to the majority of Iraqi citizens, they would tell you they are far better off now than under Saddam and enjoy many more freedoms. It's easy for someone like you to take your freedom for granted since you didn't do a thing to earn it.
And how would you know, or have you actually spoken to "the majority of Iraqi citizens"... especially the hundreds of thousands who've lost family during our occupation?
BTW, I've served my country in the military. So what's been your "contribution"... besides exercising your 'freedom' to be rude to anyone who disagrees with you, and to shoot your mouth off about stuff you obviously know nuthin' about?
And how would you know, or have you actually spoken to "the majority of Iraqi citizens"... especially the hundreds of thousands who've lost family during our occupation?
BTW, I've served my country in the military. So what's been your "contribution"... besides exercising your 'freedom' to be rude to anyone who disagrees with you, and to shoot your mouth off about stuff you obviously know nuthin' about?
I have family in both Iraq and Afghanistan right now and have had various family members and friends there since the first bomb dropped on Afaghanistan. One of my cousins flew one of first missions over Afghanistan after 9/11. I have a lot of firsthand accounts of how the people feel about their new freedom. The changes in Iraq have been phenomenal.
I am not going to question your service to the country, but your attitude doesn't really match up. My 'contribution' is to be supportive of those in the military and what they are trying to accomplish over there and not be denigrating our country and our military just for political reasons.
It's expensive to run a global empire. What would any debt-conscious conservative think about this? Or who thinks that the role of our military should be national defense, not the projection of power as cop of the world?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
There are hundreds of millions of people who were living under tyranny in the 20th century who no longer are, who have U.S. foreign policy to thank for the latter. There are still millions more struggling for freedom who use American ideals as their inspiration -- see Tiennamen Square circa 1989 for instance and the continuing liberalization of the Chinese economy and society that came of it.
Now point out where the Constitution tasks us with fighting for any country but America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
You people who find Romney's thoroughly benign suggestion that America should continue to lead the world -- who do you suggest should lead the world instead? Russia? Iran? China? Somebody is going to, if not the U.S. So who?
And you people who think the world needs a leader should THINK! Just WHY does the world need a leader? Care to tell us how the USSR's attempt at being a leader worked out for them? America should take care of America, PERIOD!
i vote we become the self-unappointed leader of the world and take care of our own problems, mitt romney be damned.
+1.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
