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 have mixed feelings on this topic. The Libertarian side of me would celebrate but part of me would be concerned as the US has always had the responsibility of "being the watch dog" of the world.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete98146
I have mixed feelings on this topic. The Libertarian side of me would celebrate but part of me would be concerned as the US has always had the responsibility of "being the watch dog" of the world.
Torn on this topic....
While we may have believed we had that responsibility, the Constitution makes NO mention of it. And looking at history, I'd say we've benefited little for how much blood & $$$ we've invested in that belief.
While we may have believed we had that responsibility, the Constitution makes NO mention of it. And looking at history, I'd say we've benefited little for how much blood & $$$ we've invested in that belief.
Quite agree with you! Wasn't saying this was a good thing but it was a role that we accepted after WWII. I'm thinking it's high time to end it and divvy this responsibility equally to other developed nations.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 28 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by rantiquity
Do people actually believe that a few troops in Syria has made any different one way or the other? American military in Syria is strictly symbolic and wasn't necessary to start with. The Syrian war is a civil war that is winding down in the government favor and the ISSI threat is almost non existent. Time to leave.... Now as far as our military generals wanting to stay...duh... they are 'military' generals and strong on the word 'military'. If there wasn't a war some where, there wouldn't be a need for their service. Duh
We are their for training other's how to engage in the battles. And to provide back up if asked to do so. Every time in the past (Bush, Obama) tried to stage a pull out of troops, chit always hit the fan. It will be interesting to see what happens this time.
The only thing winning the battles with IS (or others) is their lack of funding ... The IS ideology comes in many names as their are groups (i'm thinking some we haven't heard of yet) are all around ME and Europe. Even in a rebellion the rebels want to get paid.
Liken to that of whack-a-mole, you take out one and another pops up. Since our awareness was made by the attention getter 9/11 military generals have seen it happen over and over again ...
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 28 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete98146
Quite agree with you! Wasn't saying this was a good thing but it was a role that we accepted after WWII. I'm thinking it's high time to end it and divvy this responsibility equally to other developed nations.
I remember listening to tv news, shortly after the 9/11, where as it was said that Bush phoned our allies telling them of his intent on going to war and asking them for their support. The support he got was a slap on the back and a good luck with that ...
Since then, things have repeatedly gone boom in the night, all around Europe, with governments rethinking their stance. Yes, way past time for them to divvy it up ...
I remember listening to tv news, shortly after the 9/11, where as it was said that Bush phoned our allies telling them of his intent on going to war and asking them for their support. The support he got was a slap on the back and a good luck with that ...
Since then, things have repeatedly gone boom in the night, all around Europe, with governments rethinking their stance. Yes, way past time for them to divvy it up ...
My memory is a little different. I recall that all our NATO allies stepped up to the plate. It is the only time, ever, in NATO history that a nation ever asked for support and it was then freely given. We have since squandered that support and allegiance by making some really dumb decisions.
It's unfortunate that Right Wing Republican don't understand this even in the least of terms. They worship Trump because of Money and they think everything is "about money"... They have no compassion for American society, because they are hung up on money to the point they resent taxes supporting American Civic and Social and Civil programs... All they seem to think of is Hoarding Money.
I've said it before:
There were two types that came here from Europe.
1. Savages, who pursued wealthy by any means at any expense with regard for nothing but money. these are those of the peasant and serfs mentality who think money is the measure of man. they think having money will infer some status upon them. character and dignity as the basis of status, means nothing to them.
2. Democracy loving people, who envisaged an live in support of Democracy, its principle of Equality and its collective support in what Supports Democratic Principles, Regulatory Governance and Congressional Programs that are designed to benefit society and its citizen populations; who in turn support Global Diplomacy and Allied Relations within the Global System of Nations.
Chance and change... I could almost agree with you, but since you had to throw in that BS "Right Wing Republicans" line, when its basically an United States verses the European Union issue, you lost me. Statements like that or it was the "Left Wing Democrats" that allowed this situation to develope in the first place... Are nothing more than a useless counter-point since both the Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty by allowing the European Union not to honor their 2% agreed GDP commitment to NATO for their defense.
You have some very valid points, but your hatred for Trump allows you to be guided by emotions, instead of facts. But still, some very good points.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 28 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by bergun
Chance and change... I could almost agree with you, but since you had to throw in that BS "Right Wing Republicans" line, when its basically an United States verses the European Union issue, you lost me. Statements like that or it was the "Left Wing Democrats" that allowed this situation to develope in the first place... Are nothing more than a useless counter-point since both the Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty by allowing the European Union not to honor their 2% agreed GDP commitment to NATO for their defense.
You have some very valid points, but your hatred for Trump allows you to be guided by emotions, instead of facts. But still, some very good points.
Thank you.
Are we basing this decision on principle? When has the u.s. ever done that? Risk vs Benefit analysis, we need to review that report. $$$$$
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 28 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,592,007 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
I remember listening to tv news, shortly after the 9/11, where as it was said that Bush phoned our allies telling them of his intent on going to war and asking them for their support. The support he got was a slap on the back and a good luck with that ...
Since then, things have repeatedly gone boom in the night, all around Europe, with governments rethinking their stance. Yes, way past time for them to divvy it up ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jstarling
My memory is a little different. I recall that all our NATO allies stepped up to the plate. It is the only time, ever, in NATO history that a nation ever asked for support and it was then freely given. We have since squandered that support and allegiance by making some really dumb decisions.
This is why I try to refrain from making statements like that. In 2001 - 2002 the Internet was not what it is today. Plus with all the scrubbing that is done, very difficult to back up a statement of, what we remember ... However, I was cooking dinner, waiting on kids to do their homework, listening to the news as the evening was coming to a close. Some things I remember well, others not so much. That though ... because I was thinking on Bush's decision and saw a damn if you do, damn if you don't scenario, I remember about the phone calls he had placed. (archive.org may still have the broadcast, dunno)
The initial support Bush received (Congress later backed) was moral, not military. If I can validate with proof, I will. If not, call it hearsay and move forward. btw: I saw raw footage on the day of that help me to connect dots, however, with tapes edited afterwards I can not tell anyone of the connections. I suspect I'm not alone.
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.
