re: Isolationism

Current Events » in reply to re: Isolationism

re: Isolationism

Tom Brosz — 12/15/2005 8:56:30 PM (archived)

We had military personnel in Saudi Arabia supporting the No-Fly zones, and other U.N.-approved actions over Iraq. These activities, along with the sanctions they formerly condemned, are now put forward by the anti-war people as "what was 'working'" to contain Saddam.

Now what?

The sooner the anti-war people admit that the status quo in Iraq was not going to work forever--which seems to be their current point of view--the sooner we can get on to realistic alternatives.

BTW, if it hasn't been our military in Saudi Arabia, it would have been our support of Israel. If it hadn't been Israel, it would have been the movies or television we spread around the world. We also have to get past the "we were asking for it" syndrome.

The whole thread (79 posts)

has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq? - Daniel - 12/15/2005 12:19:11 AM
- re: has anyone mentioned that this is hardly news? - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:01:20 AM
  - You dont seem to grasp the fact.... - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:48:47 AM
    - :) Just waiting for irrelavent comparisons to WW2 - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:57:17 AM
      - Nobody said freedom was cheap. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 5:54:03 PM
        
        What price freedom/ - Doug Ellison - 12/15/2005 11:21:26 PM
        
        re: What price freedom/ - SDG - 12/16/2005 5:08:01 PM
        
        Freedom vs Lives is not a valid equation - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 7:20:52 PM
        
        The scary part is......... - Lindy - 12/16/2005 12:33:44 AM
        
        re: Nobody said freedom was cheap. - az - 12/15/2005 6:36:53 PM
        
        Okay, now I'm really confused. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:47:10 PM
        
        re: Okay, now I'm really confused. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:17:01 PM
        
        Isolationism - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:37:06 PM
        
        This thread is about Iraq. - Doug Ellisont - 12/15/2005 11:26:53 PM
        
        re: This thread is about Iraq. - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 3:25:08 PM
        
        re: This thread is about Iraq. - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 12:09:50 AM
        
        re: Isolationism - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:49:21 PM
        
        re: Isolationism - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 8:56:30 PM
        
        We were asking for it? - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 8:08:19 PM
        
        We were asking for it? - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 8:04:31 PM
        
        Non-threatening - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:58:31 PM
        
        re: Nobody said freedom was cheap. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:37:40 PM
        
        Liberals don't do "alternatives." - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:04:04 PM
  - OK, so it includes military casualties. And it's not new information either. - Daniel - 12/15/2005 7:25:39 AM
    - We went over a lot of this a long time ago. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 5:59:20 PM
      - Is it your suggestion the US should now invade Iran? (n/t) - Publius - 12/16/2005 2:55:36 PM
      - re: We went over a lot of this a long time ago. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:42:03 PM
- Never mind - Donald - 12/15/2005 2:10:44 AM
  - Good point but - Buck Galaxy - 12/15/2005 9:36:05 AM
    - yes those elections are very good news. Think of this though: - Daniel - 12/15/2005 12:56:29 PM
      - I've got a better one. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:02:16 PM
        
        Freedom and democracy...and where would that be? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 6:45:34 PM
        
        that's not really the point here - Daniel - 12/16/2005 2:38:17 AM
        
        "Could anyone still say, 'this is worth 30,000 deaths'?" - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:08:47 AM
        
        "The Iraqis will decide if the toll is worth it or not." - R.L. - 12/16/2005 7:09:48 PM
        
        it is exactly our question to answer, as it was OUR governments which initiated the invasion (n/t) - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:30:11 AM
        
        it is exactly our question to answer, as it was OUR governments which initiated the invasion (n/t) - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:29:58 AM
        
        More on Iraqi memories of Saddam - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 8:59:46 AM
        
        yep credit is due to the benefits - Daniel - 12/16/2005 9:49:50 AM
        
        Get real. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:39:21 PM
        
        re: Get real. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 8:22:45 PM
        
        re: Get real, continued. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 8:59:13 PM
        
        re: Get real, continued. - Azstrummer - 12/16/2005 7:31:49 PM
      - re: See the alternate timeline and please tell me where my assumptions are wrong. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 5:56:40 PM
        
        your assumptions were your assumptions. can't be wrong. (n/t) - alcaray - 12/15/2005 7:36:04 PM
- re: has anyone mentioned here Bush's acknowledging 30,000 Civilian casualties in Iraq? - SDG - 12/15/2005 12:58:25 AM
  - Good post. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:03:11 PM
  - NOW you want to critically question your president? - R.L. - 12/15/2005 9:52:57 AM
    - re: NOW you want to critically question your president? - SDG - 12/15/2005 4:01:59 PM
- Well, they were going to die sometime anyway, so Bush isn't really responsible. - Bowser - 12/15/2005 12:50:26 AM
- "I ask merely for information......." - Lindy - 12/15/2005 12:45:41 AM
  - Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:06:21 AM
    - We know the election is going to be a success.....Katherine Harris was placed in charge... - Publius - 12/15/2005 10:45:37 PM
      - I'll admit, the 2002 election in Iraq was much smoother. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 12/16/2005 12:11:39 AM
        
        re: I'll admit, the 2002 election in Iraq was much smoother. - Lindy - 12/16/2005 4:50:38 PM
        
        LOL (n/t) - SDG - 12/16/2005 1:01:31 AM
    - So which finger has the paint on it? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 5:30:31 PM
      - Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - SteveS - 12/15/2005 8:06:40 PM
        
        re: Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 8:25:19 PM
        
        re: Are you trying to validate Tom's post? - SteveS - 12/15/2005 9:24:06 PM
        
        IMHO Tom's posts are invalid by default - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 3:44:54 PM
        
        re: IMHO Tom's posts are invalid by default - SteveS - 12/16/2005 7:36:09 PM
        
        The support he provides is hardly balanced. - azstrummer - 12/16/2005 10:14:59 PM
        
        Wow. - Tom Brosz - 12/17/2005 3:48:07 AM
    - Dear Tom, F*** off. (n/t) - Tony - 12/15/2005 1:41:07 PM
      - Yeah, right. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:19:54 PM
        
        Same as your first reaction: - alcaray - 12/17/2005 6:43:17 PM
        
        Wishful thinking hardly makes that worth replying to. - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 7:21:48 PM
        
        Yeah, the same indignant blowfish response again. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 7:41:10 PM
      - I see the old adage about a picture saying a thousand words still holds true. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:06:26 PM
      - Steady on, old chap - Sam F. - 12/15/2005 4:41:37 PM
        
        Yeah that's right, the Brits were not involved were they - Daniel - 12/15/2005 4:57:27 PM
        
        Tom said the "American Left" - Sam F. - 12/16/2005 8:19:46 AM
    - re: Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - Doug Ellison - 12/15/2005 11:04:30 AM
      - Q.E.D. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 6:14:08 PM
      - re: Meanwhile, as the American Left desperately prays for failure... - azstrummer - 12/15/2005 5:29:14 PM
    - Is that a purple chad? (n/t) - Lindy - 12/15/2005 4:14:25 AM
      - No. - Tom Brosz - 12/15/2005 4:35:02 AM
        
        Chad or no chad...Its a beautiful thing. - Scott Evil - 12/15/2005 6:13:21 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (79 posts)