Yuku free message boards

uwisfan wrote:

---

I think Bush did a lousy job only because he got duped by Goldman Sachs (Paulson). I think having a democratic presence in Iraq, and establishing a battleground against al-Qaeda out in the open instead of in the mountains is difficult to value. The war certainly lured enough AQ out in the open and not losing the war has slowd the notion that this is the will of God to attack America.

LamontS1 wrote:

---

No one figured the war would last very long. In 2003, we all thought things would be over in a few months. In 2004, we thought it would take maybe six more months. In 2005, we thought the enemy was about finished and that we'd be out after getting over this temporary hump. In 2006, things got really bad, but the budget deficit was small that year. In 2007, we had the surge but the deficit was one of the smallest ones of the last 25 years, so it wasn't necessary to raise taxes. By 2008, the economy was too weak to consider raising taxes. So that's your answer.

badgerjon66 wrote:

---

Myles:

Which people in the M East don't want democracy, and how do you know this "fact"?

I know for a fact there is only one democracy in the middle east. Outside of Israel, it has been tried and failed. We'll see how long it lasts in Iraq. History suggests that once our police action ends, democracy will fail in Iraq as well.

Yeah, most of the nations there are very different from Western democracies and most were established and defined by arbitrary and often ignorant decisions after WWI, but that all the people there don't want democracy is an extreme generalization. Based on what?

I base my opinion upon 100 plus years of history starting before WWI

End game in Iraq? Free the people of Iraq from a brutal, murderous dictator and give them a chance for freedom and prosperity.

President Bush said from the beginning it would be a long and costly task, and it has been, but today the people of Iraq have that opportunity. Interestingly, while many here have bitterly protested America's involvement there---a lot of them for disingenuous partisan purposes---everything I see indicates that our volunteer military personnel, with very, very few exceptions, feel good about what they have done there.

Two different things here. I hope the troops feel good about what they do and continue to receive our support when put in harms way. President Bush said a lot of things. He went to war to avenge his father despite what he said at the time. When do we free the people of North Korea?

Now, the end game in Afghanistan is much less clear to me, but I hear none of the same protests from the same people who shouted that the President was responsible for every casualty----at least until last November. Where are those people now that we are suffering increased casualties in Afghanistan and actually bombing in Pakistan?

If you can't see the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, you are ignorant. Before the folly into Iraq, we had AQ on the run, cornered and probably had a good chance at giving bin laden the martyrdom he seeks. We dropped the ball, and now Obama has picked it back up. How many AQ terrorists were in Iraq before we went in?

badgering wrote:

---

Myles Long wrote:

---

Now, the end game in Afghanistan is much less clear to me, but I hear none of the same protests from the same people who shouted that the President was responsible for every casualty----at least until last November. Where are those people now that we are suffering increased casualties in Afghanistan and actually bombing in Pakistan?

If you can't see the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, you are ignorant. Before the folly into Iraq, we had AQ on the run, cornered and probably had a good chance at giving bin laden the martyrdom he seeks. We dropped the ball, and now Obama has picked it back up. How many AQ terrorists were in Iraq before we went in?

Interesting take.

I was in Normandy yesterday and spent the day touring the D-day battlefields guided by a 30 year veteran of the British Marines. Essentially, he was a commando who was also an expert on current and historical military strategy and tactics. His knowledge of everything from the Battle of Thermopylae to the Revolutionary War to the Civil War, WWI, WWII, etc. (not to mention a virtual minute-by-minute knowledge of D-day) was superb and worth every cent I paid him to accompany me. What I learned was remarkable.

He retired as a leftenant colonel and did lengthy tours in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Obviously, we discussed the current situation. His take was that (i) Iraq was a mistake but not as big of a mistake as Afghanistan would have been had the U.K. and U.S. continued ramping up and (ii) Iraq was not as big of a mistake as Afghanistan will become given that our current presence is ramping up. His belief is that strategically and tactically there is less to accomplish in Afghanistan than Iraq but, lo, if a commitment is made to tame the region, we'll be there for the next decade. THere were myriad cultural, political, geographical and other reasons behind his thinking. He also does not believe there are significant Al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan and likens Al Qaeda in Afghanistan to WMD's in Iraq.

Very interesting take.