Can you surrender if you never declare war?

[Guest]

If you want our troops to come home, your accused of surrendering (waving the white flag). can you truly surrender if you never declare war? :dontknow:
Weren't we looking for weapons of mass destructions?

[Guest]

If you want our troops to come home, your accused of surrendering (waving the white flag). can you truly surrender if you never declare war? :dontknow:
Weren't we looking for weapons of mass destructions?


MnGirl, I'm sorry, is this news to you? Didn't you hear somewhere that we've been in a 5 year war -- there are over 4,000 young lives lost for nothing -- That there were NO weapons of mass destruction. Are you just getting wind of this now? Believe me, bringing our troops home is the bravest thing our next President can do. Oh and thanks for defining surrendering (now where on earth did they hide that white flag on us. :dontknow:)

[Guest]

I just joined Talk of the Villages, and you are very rude. You must be very bitter about something or do you just get on this site and find fault with anything people say.
My subject was about wanting to have our troops come home, and I keep hearing if we do that we are surrendering. I just wanted other peoples views. Not some tongue lashing.

[Guest]

MnGirl, sorry if you think I'm rude. You haven't been battered by some that post yet. Next to them I'm a pussycat! And you're wrong if you think I'm bitter on any personal level; I'm probably one of the most positive people you'd ever meet. But, am I bitter on a political level? You're :edit: right I am. This administration has thrown our country under the bus. Politics is a frustrating, passionate subject. Why? Because it's about jobs and health care, the cost of food, the cost of gas, our environment, our children's and our children's' children's future and it's about our security and standing in the world as a nation. It touches the core of our lives.

I'll repeat, the bravest thing our next President can do is to bring our troops home. Some people say that the Clinton's Golden Economic years was all about timing. I think it's all about the cards they're dealt. George W. Bush was handed a Royal Flush and he folded. And it is my belief that McCain will follow in his footsteps. Again, this is just my opinion. As I said before, McCain's dirty laundry has not been aired yet, but it will be.

So, please continue to state your opinions. That is what this forum is all about. But sweetums, if you're going to swim with the sharks, please don't wear a chum bathing suit.

[Guest]

I'm sure you and I see eye to eye on many subjects. It's just that I expect discussion not attacks.

[Guest]

No you expect everyone to agree with you. And there are many that will. So just keeping plugging away. :joke:

[Guest]

MnGirl, I'm sorry, is this news to you? Didn't you hear somewhere that we've been in a 5 year war -- there are over 4,000 young lives lost for nothing -- That there were NO weapons of mass destruction. Are you just getting wind of this now? Believe me, bringing our troops home is the bravest thing our next President can do. Oh and thanks for defining surrendering (now where on earth did they hide that white flag on us. :dontknow:)


No one abhors the loss of military more than me. I can understand your feeling these are "lives lost for nothing," but think that's somewhat harsh. The WMD issue has been discussed on other threads, and there's more to WMDs than the big box with "WMD" stenciled on it.

The real ones to place a value on the Iraqi/Afghani deployments are those who have been there placing "boots on the ground." I don't think too many would agree with the multiple-deployment situation due to force-size-versus-tasking, but on the human-to-human situation over there, and what has or has not been accomplished in other-than-philosophical terms.

Seeing things only through the eyes of the media, and hearing things only from those trying to sway opinion for their own gain, that makes it quite difficult to sort the "wheat" from the "chaff."

I want them home, too - but not at the price of having to go back in a decade or two at ten-times the cost. WWI led to WWII that way, and Korea occurred because of haste to demobilize. So, hopefully some downstream thought will be applied to the when-and-why, to include any preventive measures as appropriate.

Peace is always the goal - but a short-term lull to appease only provides a false sense of "peace" that inevitably has led to a worse confrontation downstream. So, how do we have a LASTING (more than three generations, at least) peace out of this so the kids and granddids of today's warriors don't find themselves cleaning up any leftover mess?

[Guest]

But SteveZ, peace is Not alway the goal of politicians and profiteers! Lots of people make lots of money on wars. And I'm sticking to the fact that we should never have been in Iraq to begin with. Afghanistan, YES!

[Guest]

No one abhors the loss of military more than me. I can understand your feeling these are "lives lost for nothing," but think that's somewhat harsh. The WMD issue has been discussed on other threads, and there's more to WMDs than the big box with "WMD" stenciled on it.

The real ones to place a value on the Iraqi/Afghani deployments are those who have been there placing "boots on the ground." I don't think too many would agree with the multiple-deployment situation due to force-size-versus-tasking, but on the human-to-human situation over there, and what has or has not been accomplished in other-than-philosophical terms.

Seeing things only through the eyes of the media, and hearing things only from those trying to sway opinion for their own gain, that makes it quite difficult to sort the "wheat" from the "chaff."

I want them home, too - but not at the price of having to go back in a decade or two at ten-times the cost. WWI led to WWII that way, and Korea occurred because of haste to demobilize. So, hopefully some downstream thought will be applied to the when-and-why, to include any preventive measures as appropriate.

Peace is always the goal - but a short-term lull to appease only provides a false sense of "peace" that inevitably has led to a worse confrontation downstream. So, how do we have a LASTING (more than three generations, at least) peace out of this so the kids and granddids of today's warriors don't find themselves cleaning up any leftover mess?


I expect some armies will need to be in the Middle East region for decades to come because of the resources located there and the various culture clashes involving the juxtaposition of the different faithes in that area.

Why does it have to be primarily US troops over there though? You would expect Russia, India, Germany, France and China to also have troops there if peace keeping were the central mission in that area.

[Guest]

But SteveZ, peace is Not alway the goal of politicians and profiteers! Lots of people make lots of money on wars. And I'm sticking to the fact that we should never have been in Iraq to begin with. Afghanistan, YES!


I remember the old Star Trek "Ferengi Rules of Acquisition" which included "War is good for business" and "Peace is good for business." It does seem that the former occurs more often than the latter.

Whether we should have been in these sites or not is now moot. Our forces are there. We can't change that regardless of who was right or wrong. So, what's the best way out that will guarantee (as much as possible) no return for a few generations?

As far as why the other countries are not keen to get militarily involved may have to do with the fact that they probably logistically supply all factions ("War is good for business"), but without fanfare.

It's what can be described as a "Devil's Alternative." There is no "win" solution, but which solution results in losing the least - now and especially in the future. It's a shame that clairvoyance isn't a trait amongst all of us.

[Guest]

Excellent Steve.

[Guest]

It's what can be described as a "Devil's Alternative." There is no "win" solution, but which solution results in losing the least - now and especially in the future. It's a shame that clairvoyance isn't a trait amongst all of us.


I knew you were going to say that.

[Guest]

I knew you were going to say that.

.....okay.....(LOL)