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.
I blame it on the liberal ideology that believes that Muslim fundamentalists can be expected to adopt a civil way of life. (And yes, I consider George W. Bush a liberal.) This is the same reason that Europe and many in the US have no problem with letting these people to immigrate. And the reason it is producing disasterous results. Islam does not provide a basis for the western/Christian-based system of democracy. The only reason some Middle East countries came close to approaching a westen way of life in the decades preceding the Arab Spring is because their leaders enforced a secular way of governing.
It's disgusting, and we are stuck there. If only we had stayed in Iraq and let Afghanistan hang. Bush was an idiot for getting us mired down over there, but Obama screwed up too by leaving Iraq and staying there. No strategic value at all. As much as I hate these wars, at least McCain would have kept ISIS from flourishing and we could have had an end game.
It's disgusting, and we are stuck there. If only we had stayed in Iraq and let Afghanistan hang. Bush was an idiot for getting us mired down over there, but Obama screwed up too by leaving Iraq and staying there. No strategic value at all. As much as I hate these wars, at least McCain would have kept ISIS from flourishing and we could have had an end game.
If a country is responsible for why the US went in there in the first place (whether it is the actions of a dictator or the fact that they won't clean up their own messes which are threatening others around the world in some way) and it is deemed necessary to go in and take care of an issue - we should do the job as quickly as possible, do it right and get the heck out again. No reparations, no rebuilding, no training their people to kill ours the next time, no giving them weapons to do that either. Just quick and dirty - take care of the problem - and out again. No 'war' .. just 'problem solving' required.
I blame those presidents who were too soft and who insisted we stay and 'rebuild' etc. That is some kind of crazy and of course it will be expensive and in the case of these muslim countries apparently it is not really appreciated and the job will be sabotaged, lengthy conflicts will ensue and it will cost us an arm and a leg (especially if we don't have strong rules of engagement).
This is sad. Yet people are still convinced that we need to keep hanging around despite no progress whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68
No strategic value at all.
Plenty of strategic value. You can smuggle weapons and supplies into Central Asia and also into Iran (not to mention smuggling weapons into Baluchistan which straddles the Iran-Pakistani Border).
You'll need bases in both Iraq and Afghanistan when you finally initiate military action against Iran. That'll be sometime after Trump finishes what Obama started in Syria and Yemen.
And Libya may require a do-over with Russians deploying special ops units to Egypt:
Exclusive: Russia appears to deploy forces in Egypt, eyes on Libya role - sources
The whole point of "Regime Change" in Libya was to keep the Russians out.
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.
