--Would our ground forces be "credible" if they were tied up in large numbers in Afghanistan instead of Iraq, which is what liberals have said should have been done? Why or why not?
--Were our troops "credible" when we had them lined up in battalions outside Iraq, AFTER we had taken Afganistan down, and asked Saddam to step down? Go back and look at what Saddam thought back then.
--I notice you ignored my statement on the Navy and Air Force. Our military is one hell of a long way from being "tied up," except in terms of occupying forces. Do you think we should be occupying Iran? Why?
It would help if you followed the logic diagrams all the way to the end. You're not even self-consistent.
You know, if you're really concerned about our "credibility" as a military force, how about addressing that large contingent of Americans, including one of our major political parties, who believe that the proper military policy is for America to bail out when things start getting a little rough?
How is that helping our "credibility?" Do you like seeing terrorists and insurgents quoting Democratic leaders in their tirades?
Current Events » in reply to By having a force that is not tied up in a mess like Iraq....
A few questions:
The whole thread (41 posts)
- "Rice on Iran: 'We can't let this continue'"
- It's probably a matter of when
- re: "We can't let this continue"
- Tom, are we in a better or worse position to deal with Iran because of our action on Iraq
- I'M an idiot?
- Unfortunately...
- Iran One Step Closer To Nukes
- Tom, are we in a better or worse position to deal with Iran because of our action on Iraq
- From another board: "Please relay this important message...
