[B767drvr]

I do think it's important to ALWAYS evaluate past strategies and outcomes so that we learn from our mistakes (both diplomatically and militarily) and are more effective and efficient in future conflicts. Many people predicted a civil war along tribal lines if the brutal dictator Hussein was removed from power. We've seen the same thing in Libya and Egypt most recently. At some point you have to choose the lesser of two evils. Which route results in the least loss of life commensurate with maintaining our national interest? Did Hussein kill more or did 8+ years of war and now a civil war among tribes?

My PERSONAL (Libertarian) opinion is to basically allow civil wars and regional conflicts to be decided locally, interfering ONLY when America's strategic national interest is threatened (Syria most recently.) In Iraq I would arm the Kurds in the north with modern weaponry, let Iran arm and defend the Shia's in the south, and ISIS will (unfortunately) get its weapons/funding by sympathetic Sunni friends. There are a lot of nations with strategic national interests and security concerns jockeying in this part of the world. DO NOT put US boots on the ground and spill any more blood policing this bad neighborhood.

For those that truly have a fear for the future all I can say is that the US military is incredibly capable and has a devastating arsenal of weaponry. What it lacks, or rather is constrained by, is the political will to unleash any more than tiny bits of it. The ENTIRE country of Iraq could quite easily be leveled (similar to the terrible scenes in Gaza) in just a few days using airpower alone if it weren't for the massive loss of life that would ensue (MILLIONS.) The world community simply won't stand for that level of brutality and destruction… and rightly so. Therefore, we use "surgical" airstrikes dropping a few dozen 500 lb bombs and essentially tap the enemy on the head with what amounts to a little wooden chopstick. Make no mistake though, we are capable of killing the bad guy if the political will exists. And by political will… I'm referring to "acceptable" collateral civilian damage as very little is truly "surgical" on this scale.

Just my thoughts though… your mileage may vary.

[Chi-Town]

Originally Posted by sunnyatlast

"When Hussein was in power there was no Isis and no al Qaeda." Yeah. Right. That's why Pres. Clinton was trying to get Bin Laden way back in the 1990s.

"Al-Qaeda (/�lˈkaɪdə/ al-ky-də; Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-qāʿidah, Arabic: [�lqɑːʕɪdɐ], translation: "The Base" and alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa'ida) is a global militant Islamist and Wahhabist organization founded by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, and several other militants, at some point between August 1988 and late 1989, with its origins being traceable to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. It operates as a network comprising both a multinational, stateless army and a radical Wahhabi Muslim movement calling for global jihad and a strict interpretation of sharia law. It has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United Nations Security Council, NATO, the European Union, the United States, Russia, India and various other countries (see below). Al-Qaeda has carried out many attacks targets it considers kafir. Amidst the Syrian civil war, Al-Qaeda factions started fighting each other, as well as the Kurds and government.

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, including the September 11 attacks, 1998 U.S. embassy bombings and the 2002 Bali bombings." wikipedia

Calm down. I was referencing Iraq in my post. No al Qaeda in Iraq when Hussein was in power.

[zonerboy]

Ever wonder where terrorist groups such as ISIS and Hamas get the money for their missiles and other weaponry??
Answer:
From us. Every dollar we spend on Arab oil helps arm and support these groups. We need energy independence NOW!

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by zonerboy

Ever wonder where terrorist groups such as ISIS and Hamas get the money for their missiles and other weaponry??
Answer:
From us. Every dollar we spend on Arab oil helps arm and support these groups. We need energy independence NOW!

Weapons from the fleeing Iraqy army. Money from the banks in the cities they raped.

[rubicon]

Prior to World War I Europeans were fat dumb and happy and never for a second anticipated the immensity or the possibility of World War I nor its continuation in to World War II. Since that time Europe has never been the same.

Iraqi Freedom was right to rid the country of a mad man. The idea of some sort of democracy there was a seedling that would have continued to grow through out this region. Unfortunately politicians interfered. Many people are not aware of the fact that the colonist were calling for independence 100 years before the Declaration of Independence was signed. Building a democracy takes time patience and a strong will

War is evil and evil has existed since the beginning of mankind. Nature abhors a vacuum and the best we can do is, our level best to see it is filled to the betterment and not the detriment of mankind. In order to maintain that equilibrium peace through a strong defense is needed. Politicians scrambling for votes ignored this premise. Our enemies sensing this failure to act are filling this vacuum with the likes of ISIS,Iran, Syria, Russia, etc. Even border patrol agents are now expressing fear of mounted attacks by undesirables at our southern border.

Human nature is never going to change and any perception of weakness is going to get you killed. The good characteristic of human nature is that men have a tendency , a code that says don't attack the weaker, protect them. So when men see that the weak are being victimized they act.

It may sound corny and perhaps naive by some but if American does not return to asserting itself as the superpower that seeks justice and democracy for all we will eventually perish.

[Taltarzac725]

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I followed the news on the Middle East but would like to do more research before voicing an opinion.

[Rags123]

Originally Posted by Chi-Town

When Hussein was in power there was no Isis and no al Qaeda. There was a powerful dictator with an iron fist. Iran was a mortal enemy. We took him out for the flimsiest of reasons, and I would be hard pressed to consider the new government a democracy by any means. And to go back in and try it again is some form of insanity.

Please see "The Iraq Liberation" act signed by President Clinton in 1998.

Then check comments by his administration officials concerning Al Queda

Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam - Washington Times

Iraq Liberation Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I might add that we live in a very very small world now, with what appears to be a leaky border. Read the various reports by border officials concerning NOT Central Americans trying to cross in Texas, BUT folks from middle eastern countries.

Point is President Obama must act...in my opinion in defense of our country.

[Shimpy]

Originally Posted by B767drvr

Therefore, we use "surgical" airstrikes dropping a few dozen 500 lb bombs and essentially tap the enemy on the head with what amounts to a little wooden chopstick. Make no mistake though, we are capable of killing the bad guy if the political will exists. And by political will� I'm referring to "acceptable" collateral civilian damage as very little is truly "surgical" on this scale.
.

Collateral damage is a relatively recent term. During WWII when we firebombed and carpet bombed Germany and Japan, we didn't hinder ourselves with the fear of civilians dying. When we dropped both of the atomic bombs on Japan we ended the war and saved hundred of thousands of lives.
These Muslims are far worse than Hitler and do want to take over the world and as far as collateral damage is concerned if we want to win it than it just has to be. We have to look out for ourself and our allies.

[sunnyatlast]

Best statement here:

Originally Posted by rubicon

...Nature abhors a vacuum and the best we can do is, our level best to see it is filled to the betterment and not the detriment of mankind. In order to maintain that equilibrium peace through a strong defense is needed. Politicians scrambling for votes ignored this premise. Our enemies sensing this failure to act are filling this vacuum with the likes of ISIS,Iran, Syria, Russia, etc.....

[wendyquat]

Originally Posted by Shimpy

Collateral damage is a relatively recent term. During WWII when we firebombed and carpet bombed Germany and Japan, we didn't hinder ourselves with the fear of civilians dying. When we dropped both of the atomic bombs on Japan we ended the war and saved hundred of thousands of lives.
These Muslims are far worse than Hitler and do want to take over the world and as far as collateral damage is concerned if we want to win it than it just has to be. We have to look out for ourself and our allies.

I agree and considering their brutality and determination I'd suggest we remove the threat BEFORE they have access to nuclear weapons!

[Tennisnut]

Originally Posted by Shimpy

Collateral damage is a relatively recent term. During WWII when we firebombed and carpet bombed Germany and Japan, we didn't hinder ourselves with the fear of civilians dying. When we dropped both of the atomic bombs on Japan we ended the war and saved hundred of thousands of lives.
These Muslims are far worse than Hitler and do want to take over the world and as far as collateral damage is concerned if we want to win it than it just has to be. We have to look out for ourself and our allies.

I believe "These Muslims" have a long ways to go before they equal the death and suffering that Hitler inflicted on the Jews, Western and Eastern Europe and Russia during WWII. Six million Jews alone as well as millions of others died during that horrific war. They do not have the backing and resources of a whole nation as did Hitler and are looked upon as outlaws by the majority of Muslim countries.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Originally Posted by Tennisnut

I believe "These Muslims" have a long ways to go before they equal the death and suffering that Hitler inflicted on the Jews, Western and Eastern Europe and Russia during WWII. Six million Jews alone as well as millions of others died during that horrific war. They do not have the backing and resources of a whole nation as did Hitler and are looked upon as outlaws by the majority of Muslim countries.

As I understand, radical Islam is responsible for 120 million deaths in Africa alone.

[Tennisnut]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

As I understand, radical Islam is responsible for 120 million deaths in Africa alone.

Your source must be Pamela Geller.

[kittygilchrist]

Ever feel like a grasshopper?

[nicoletta]

sigh... denying the truth doesn't mean it isn't true.
.i personally think the following
we are in the midst of the start of a new "world order" World War..religious differences has caused countless deaths throughout mankind's history..more than any other cause...

a few quotes to ponder

Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man.

Faith: not wanting to know what is true.

The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies but also to hate his friends.

All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
well that should be enough to ponder..for now!