• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gov. Scott Walker: Don't Rule Out 'Boots on the Ground' Against ISIS

US Conservative said:
There is a war "for us" there-at least Obama seems to think so.
Click to expand...
You seem to think so. I don't give a **** what Obama thinks... Im not in a forum with him. I am with you. And I want to know why you agree with him.

We gain an ally and deny that territory to Iran and ISIS, exactly what we aren't doing now.
Click to expand...
We all know Iraq will never be an ally of the United States. That part of the world is too volatile for anything to last long at all..
 
US Conservative said:
America should be looking out for its own best interests, like every nation does. Isolationism, incidentally isn't in our own best interests. Weve already learned this the hard way.
Click to expand...

And what hard way was that?

You mean before we were known around the world to have a 1st class military and someone decided to attack us?

The world is a different scene now..... You can't use Pearl Harbor as an example anymore.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
You have yet to provide any sources to back up your claims. Prior to our going into Iraq, the predecessor to Al Qaeda was a militant jihadist organization that was founded in Jordan to overthrow the king of Jordan. However, Al Qaeda in Iraq that later became ISIS was formed in Iraq in 2004. Even the Israeli lobby admits that:

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/ResearchNote_20_Zelin.pdf
Click to expand...

I see nothing in your source confirming your claim that ISIS was trying to overthrow Saddam. Perhaps you can point it out.
 
Gill said:
I see nothing in your source confirming your claim that ISIS was trying to overthrow Saddam. Perhaps you can point it out.
Click to expand...

After we invaded Afghanistan, Jamaat al-Tawhid wa-l-Jihad affiliated with the Kurdish Islamist group Ansar al Islam. Saddam used his intelligence to monitor the group believing them to be a threat to Iraq. This was all confirmed in the Senate Report on Pre-War intelligence: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
 
iguanaman said:
When the FBI went to the Flight school they found out that Moussaoui only wanted to learn to fly and turn wide body jets and no take-offs and landings. That is what set off the red flags. They did not need FISA to investigate other flight schools either.
Click to expand...

Again, false. And to be able to connect the dots they would need the info that FISA specifically barred them from gathering.

Are you saying that they should have profiled Moussaoui? You do realize that you have the benefit of the outcome to guide your judgment of what they should have done, yes?
 
AJiveMan said:
Why the need for American troops at all? Can't those people defend themselves? Here, I'll answer the last question for you, NO, they left their arms that we gave them on the battle field and ran away like a bunch of scared children. Malaki and the Iraqis have nobody to blame except themselves.

Keep on blaming Obama though, it makes the conservative look good to other conservative chickenhawks in forums.
Click to expand...

The 16,000 troops requested by Gates were intended to carry out an ongoing training and support mission because we knew the Iraqi forces were not ready to defend themselves.

The fact that they were not ready to defend themselves is not an excuse for leaving them to the Barbarian hordes.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
After we invaded Afghanistan, Jamaat al-Tawhid wa-l-Jihad affiliated with the Kurdish Islamist group Ansar al Islam. Saddam used his intelligence to monitor the group believing them to be a threat to Iraq. This was all confirmed in the Senate Report on Pre-War intelligence: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
Click to expand...

Ahhh, so Saddam "believed" them to be a threat. Now point out where ISIS tried to actually overthrow Saddam.

You are beating around the bush.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
We left that nation with an elected government and a defense force numbering in the hundreds of thousands. If they government is so corrupt and inept that they cannot defeat a militant force number 30,000 at most in their own country, then how in the world is that our fault?
Click to expand...

We left a nation that was not ready to stand on its own two legs. Period.
 
Caine said:
You seem to think so. I don't give a **** what Obama thinks... Im not in a forum with him. I am with you. And I want to know why you agree with him.

We all know Iraq will never be an ally of the United States. That part of the world is too volatile for anything to last long at all..
Click to expand...

Yeah what does it matter the the Commander in Chief thinks? :shock:

And we dont agree-I believe in substantive action, he believes in symbolic and highly visible air attacks to hold things over until he's out of the white house. See the difference?
 
US Conservative said:
Yeah what does it matter the the Commander in Chief thinks? :shock:

And we dont agree-I believe in substantive action, he believes in symbolic and highly visible air attacks to hold things over until he's out of the white house. See the difference?
Click to expand...

Why don't you enlist and join the fight?
 
Caine said:
And what hard way was that?

You mean before we were known around the world to have a 1st class military and someone decided to attack us?

The world is a different scene now..... You can't use Pearl Harbor as an example anymore.
Click to expand...

Why, because you say so? A few zealots plunged the entire world into war while we buried our heads in the sand. Sounds an awful lot like now.
 
jmotivator said:
The 16,000 troops requested by Gates were intended to carry out an ongoing training and support mission because we knew the Iraqi forces were not ready to defend themselves.

The fact that they were not ready to defend themselves is not an excuse for leaving them to the Barbarian hordes.
Click to expand...

Obama's own staff TOLD HIM Iraq wasn't ready to stand on its own feet, and Obama left anyway. And now here we are. More of that spectacular "smart diplomacy" we hear so much about.
 
US Conservative said:
Funny you dont extend this fallacy to Obama or Clinton.
Click to expand...

There you go again with the Partisan Hackery.



Can you debate any subject without bringing up Clinton?
 
Caine said:
There you go again with the Partisan Hackery.



Can you debate any subject without bringing up Clinton?
Click to expand...

She may be the next POTUS.

She has said they are worse than AQ which she supported military action against. She says ISIS is not a legitimate state. And that a lack of intervention in Syria is what led to this.

Guess where she's leaning? :2wave:
 
US Conservative said:
She may be the next POTUS.

She has said they are worse than AQ which she supported military action against. She says ISIS is not a legitimate state. And that a lack of intervention in Syria is what led to this.

Guess where she's leaning? :2wave:
Click to expand...


Yeah, the fact that Clinton and Walker agree on this topic is lost on the Democrat supporters. Walker is a chicken hawk for not ruling out military intervention and Clinton is SQUIRREL!
 
jmotivator said:
Yeah, the fact that Clinton and Walker agree on this topic is lost on the Democrat supporters. Walker is a chicken hawk for not ruling out military intervention and Clinton is SQUIRREL!
Click to expand...

Its all part of the remarkable fractured thinking of the left. She should strap on a machine gun and parachute into ISIS territory apparently.
 
jmotivator said:
Yeah, the fact that Clinton and Walker agree on this topic is lost on the Democrat supporters. Walker is a chicken hawk for not ruling out military intervention and Clinton is SQUIRREL!
Click to expand...

It's also lost on US Conservative:

US Conservative said:
Democrats appear fine with letting it get much larger.
Click to expand...

Or maybe Clinton isn't a Democrat. How many times can a person contradict himself in one thread?
 
rocket88 said:
It's also lost on US Conservative:

Or maybe Clinton isn't a Democrat. How many times can a person contradict himself in one thread?
Click to expand...

The Democrats on this forum certainly support that. They simply ignore Clinton's position for political reasons (a distinct lack of a "chicken hawk" thread about Hillary Clinton started by AJiveMan is noted). It will be interesting to see Clinton and Warren spar on this subject.
 
Last edited:
US Conservative said:
What?
Click to expand...

The fact that Clinton and Walker agree on it is completely lost on you. You can't jizz fast enough over Walker saying it, yet "Democrats want to let it get bigger" even though Clinton supports the same thing. Are you going to fall all over yourself to praise her position, or only Republicans?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom