"I'm GGG and I approve this message."

[bling trade]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
In this debate, if you stop making payments on that pony, a multinational terror haven for Islamist extremists bent on attacking our country will erupt in our wake and destabilize the entire Middle East and have hideous economic effects on every single global market.
...

We broke it. We bought it. It's a rotten, shitty situation, but that's the reality of it. So if we're stuck there and have to keep troops on the ground, then why not a Surge that has shown some positive results?

Iraq's problems are huge, but they are caused by its tribalism and corruption, not by the US invastion and they mostly hurt the Iraqi people, not the US. So it is very questionable why the US benefits from fixing these problems and why the US is morally responsible for fixing them.

We benefit from invading other countries just long enough to destry terrorist infrastructure and pull out. Destroying terrorist infrastructure provides a good return on investment to US citizens. We should pull out of Iraq, and go destroy the terrorist infrastructure that's built up in Afganistan and Pakistan. If terrorists build camps in Iraq, we should return. Doing more than that is a waste of time, money, and US lives.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by bling trade
Iraq's problems are huge, but they are caused by its tribalism and corruption, not by the US invastion and they mostly hurt the Iraqi people, not the US. So it is very questionable why the US benefits from fixing these problems and why the US is morally responsible for fixing them.

We benefit from invading other countries just long enough to destry terrorist infrastructure and pull out. Destroying terrorist infrastructure provides a good return on investment to US citizens. We should pull out of Iraq, and go destroy the terrorist infrastructure that's built up in Afganistan and Pakistan. If terrorists build camps in Iraq, we should return. Doing more than that is a waste of time, money, and US lives.

We owe Iraq support because we shattered the govt that kept all the warring tribes under control. And if we leave, Islamists will eventually, sooner or later (sooner, I think) take over the nation, which would hurt our interests.

BTW, we didn't destory a terrorist over there. We set up a home base in the Middle East and a pretext to stay in the region forever. Bush put us there knowing we'd be there as a presence for the long term. He just guessed wrongly on the degree and duration of time.

If we could tap Iraq's oil and glut the market to drive down price, that would be in our interest. Why we haven't is still confusing me. Of all the investments we made there, why refining and rebuilding and protecting the pipelines aren't paramount is a puzzling and kind of troubling question. Where's all that cheap fucking oil? It's supposedly the world's #2 reserve.

[bling trade]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
We owe Iraq support because we shattered the govt that kept all the warring tribes under control. And if we leave, Islamists will eventually, sooner or later (sooner, I think) take over the nation, which would hurt our interests.

Most Iraqi's want a government just like Iran's. If we pull out they will get one. But that is fine. Iran doesn't allow terrorist camps to operate there.

Trying to prevent Iraq from having a theocracy like in Iran is a waste of time and money. That is what the majority of the population wants.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
sounds like you didn't really want a pony in the first place

Who wouldn't want a pony?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Who wouldn't want a pony?

you should vote for Obama! If he wins, everyone who wants a pony will get one!

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you should vote for Obama! If he wins, everyone who wants a pony will get one!

We should send McCain to Assateague to see what kind of stump speech he gives to the mares.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you should vote for Obama! If he wins, everyone who wants a pony will get one!

You're about four years late on that one, but thanks for playing.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by bling trade
Most Iraqi's want a government just like Iran's. If we pull out they will get one. But that is fine. Iran doesn't allow terrorist camps to operate there.

Trying to prevent Iraq from having a theocracy like in Iran is a waste of time and money. That is what the majority of the population wants.

I disagree. Say what you will about the rest of his policies, Iraqis enjoyed a secular state under Hussein. And most of the Iranians don't want the theocracy they have, so I find it hard to swallow the idea the Iraqis would.

It's not a waste of money to keep the world's second largest oil reserves out of the hands of an Islamic theocracy. Let the religious nuts in Iran control the Iraqi government and you'll see a war with Israel and total destabilization of the region, with an amazingly bad effect on the price of oil.

In the short term, it looks like we're wasting money. In the long term I think it's money well spent (under the circumstances, in which I'd suggest it's also, or alternatively, money necessarily spent).

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
We should send McCain to Assateague to see what kind of stump speech he gives to the mares.

you should have made the joke about Bush being afraid to leave Chincoteague.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You're about four years late on that one, but thanks for playing.

obama is 35 years late.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Spanky
I guess it comes down to whether you think one American life is worth more than a hundred non-American lives. If you don’t think American lives should be sacrificed to save foreign lives, then the pacifists have it right.

For the avoidance of doubt, I expressly do not think that one American life is worth more than the life of anyone else.

[bling trade]

Originally posted by Spanky
I also need to point out that sometimes there is an unholy alliance between the pacifists and the “only in the US strategic interest” crowd which tends to be conservative. These two groups from the left and right kept us out of Bosnia, tried to prevent our intervention in Kosovo, joined up to keep us out of Rwanda and are now joining up to keep us out of Darfur. A pox on both their houses.

I agree that our spending on foreign aid is pathetic. Especially since ninety percent of it goes to Egypt and Israel. The problem is that foreign aid is highly unpopular among the American public, and that will be part of Obama’s undoing.

I believe it is an abuse of power send american troops abroad to advance an idealistic agenda of "helping" foreign countries, or to use free trade agreements of "helping" foreign countries. The US electorate does not support subsidizing the non-US poor at its own expense. That is why the US has never spent much in foreign aid, and will never spend much in foreign aid. A backlash has been building against these things. McCain's support of things like this is a major reason why he will lose the election. The public simply does not support it.

[bling trade]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I disagree. Say what you will about the rest of his policies, Iraqis enjoyed a secular state under Hussein. And most of the Iranians don't want the theocracy they have, so I find it hard to swallow the idea the Iraqis would.

I wish it weren't true. I really do. However, the unfortunate truth is that the majority of Iran and Iraq want to live under Islamic law. Most people I've met from Iran think the majority of Iran wants to live under Islamic law. It is a smaller majority in Iraq, because of the Kurds, but still a majority.

[Adder]

Originally posted by bling trade
I believe it is an abuse of power send american troops abroad to advance an idealistic agenda of "helping" foreign countries, or to use free trade agreements of "helping" foreign countries. The US electorate does not support subsidizing the non-US poor at its own expense. That is why the US has never spent much in foreign aid, and will never spend much in foreign aid. A backlash has been building against these things. McCain's support of things like this is a major reason why he will lose the election. The public simply does not support it.

The American public (and, it appears, you) have a very short-sighted and simplistic view of its own interest. Which is kind of amazing after 9/11 made so explicitly clear what can happen when we (and the rest of the world) decide to leave a place like Afghanistan to descend into chaos.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by bling trade
I wish it weren't true. I really do. However, the unfortunate truth is that the majority of Iran and Iraq want to live under Islamic law. Most people I've met from Iran think the majority of Iran wants to live under Islamic law. It is a smaller majority in Iraq, because of the Kurds, but still a majority.

Well, even in that scenario, there is moderate Islamic law and then there is extremism. Afghanistan is governed under Islamic law and where the state can claim to have control, it is not an extremist system. Iraq could be governed under a code informed by Islam. But if we walk away, that is not what will happen. It will plunge into tribal infighting, split into three pieces and become the capitol of terrorism and rabid fundamentalism in the world.