View Poll Results: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threat?

Voters
85. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    22 25.88%
  • No

    63 74.12%
Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 230

Thread: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threat?

  1. #191
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    One where he does not define "leftist" as anyone who disagrees with him on anything.

    Obama is Bush III and Bush II was a right leaning centrist.

    It must be Mars or Venus.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  2. #192
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by ObamacareFail View Post
    That is silly reactionist thought. The Taliban and Al Queda were our enemies when we invaded....and they are our enemies now. That has not changed. Terrorists can always find fanatical morons to join their cause. And to be fair, we did obtain a real victory in Afghanistan. You do notice that the Afghan government is no longer run by the Taliban, don't you? They were tossed out of power in fairly short order. What we have not won is the peace after the victory. To do that, we are going to have to allow the US military to fight without having one hand tied behind their backs(in effect). The rules of engagement are far too restrictive. We should have learned that lesson in Vietnam.
    We bombed those countries heavily and killed thousands of people but the quantity of our enemies is roughly the same or higher. There was no Al Qeda in Iraq until we got there. In both places we supported corrupt governments that screwed over a large portion of their people, which is a major cause of the current problems. The overall quantity of Islamist militants has increased and they have spread to more places. Our wars are their best recruitment tool. I don't believe the rules of engagement argument. We bombed the crap out of Viet Nam and killed thousands. The problem is that outside invaders can't win a foreign guerilla war or civil war without committing genocide and/or destroying the place.

  3. #193
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,977

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by PoS View Post
    Bush was winning? Then why are we still in Iraq? And why has lots of territory in the ME been seized by an organization which is rumored to be worse than Al Qeda?

    Doesnt seem like a win at all.
    I doubt that you know the difference. There were actually two victories in Iraq. The original goal was liberating Iraq from the Saddam Hussein regime. That occurred in a matter of weeks. The second victory was not quite that easy, however the surge strategy did eventually beat down the insurgency. The violence levels actually dropped down to a very low level. The ISIS threat is something new that popped up over 5 years into the Obama administration.....due to two Obama administration failures. First, he was too soft on pushing a S.O.F.A. agreement with Iraq that would have left a contingent of quick reaction US forces in Iraq....and second, Obama mucked it up so badly in Syria that he could not contain the ISIS threat there and keep it from spreading to Iraq.

  4. #194
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,977

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I have no desire reading an overtly partisan book advocated by an outrageously partisan member of this forum.
    Again, you are making it up as you go along. No partisanship here. I am an a conservative independent who has little use for establishment politicians in either party. And your suggestion that the author of "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" was a partisan is utterly hilarious. The author is dead and gone now, however in all probability he was a liberal. He was a journalist. He was in Germany most of the time WW2 was going on and he was a well respected war correspondant and historian. I suggest you read the book and perhaps avoid looking foolish in the future.

    It is not up for debate that right after Chamberlain returned from the signing with Hitler he ordered the largest military buildup the UK has ever seen. That alone is definitive proof that Chamberlain knew war was coming and that the UK had to prepare. Furthermore, anyone who thinks that the UK was ready for war at that time is kidding themselves.
    That was Chamberlains way of admitting that the UK was caught with it's pants down around it's ankles. There was a reason the UK was not ready for war. When war broke out, they had their military spread out all over the third world taking care of their colonies. That was a price that the UK paid for centuries of imperialism.


    Too bad Rummy didn't pay attention to the lessons Chamberlain taught us. We probably could have saved billions of dollars and thousands of lives not rushing to war with a military not ready for that conflict.
    Yet again, you are making it up as you go along. The US military was very much ready for war. It had the troops as well as the highest technology equipment available in modern times. What the US was not ready for and did not foresee was the level of the insurgency. However that had nothing to do with battle readiness. It was a matter of how long it took to plan and carry out the surge strategy.

  5. #195
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,977

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Given the state of the UK's military, he had little choice. Only an extremely idiotic strategist would rush to war completely unready, lose the core of his nation's army and then be sitting duck for the counter attack. Chamberlain bought time, time the UK badly needed to build up its military for the coming storm. Extremely partisans fail to realize this because they have no sense of history at all. Anyone with a brain who's looked at the UK military before WWII knows they were weak, both in manpower and in kit..
    Actually the Brits and the French had opportunities to stop WW2 before it started. They could have for instance stopped the Germans at the Maginot line. At the time the German Army was not ready or to stand up to the Brit and French military. It would have been the end of Hitler.

  6. #196
    Sage
    ObamacareFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,977

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    We bombed those countries heavily and killed thousands of people but the quantity of our enemies is roughly the same or higher. There was no Al Qeda in Iraq until we got there. In both places we supported corrupt governments that screwed over a large portion of their people, which is a major cause of the current problems. The overall quantity of Islamist militants has increased and they have spread to more places. Our wars are their best recruitment tool. I don't believe the rules of engagement argument. We bombed the crap out of Viet Nam and killed thousands. The problem is that outside invaders can't win a foreign guerilla war or civil war without committing genocide and/or destroying the place.
    I will restrict my response to your suggestion that there was no Al Queda in Iraq until we got there. My response is: Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
    Last edited by ObamacareFail; 08-28-14 at 07:03 PM.

  7. #197
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,299

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I wish that was so but its not.
    Yet another poll not working out quite like you planned. Imagine that?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    You have no empirical evidence backing up your false assertion. You are simply conjecturing based on a whim...
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye10 View Post
    Or maybe "We now understand why women provoke men into hitting them".
    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    . Losing insurance does not mean losing healthcare. .

  8. #198
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,299

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    46-17 in favor of not sending troops in. That does not surprise me considering DP is a left leaning forum.
    Do you favor putting boots on the ground in  the Midddle East to combat the threat?-77-33-jpg

    LOLOLOLOL You were so sure you would get support. Yet another epic fail.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    You have no empirical evidence backing up your false assertion. You are simply conjecturing based on a whim...
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye10 View Post
    Or maybe "We now understand why women provoke men into hitting them".
    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    . Losing insurance does not mean losing healthcare. .

  9. #199
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    What say you?
    Not with the current CIC, I don't. Hell no! He'll do more harm than good.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #200
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: Do you favor putting boots on the ground in the Midddle East to combat the threa

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Given the state of the UK's military, he had little choice. Only an extremely idiotic strategist would rush to war completely unready, lose the core of his nation's army and then be sitting duck for the counter attack. Chamberlain bought time, time the UK badly needed to build up its military for the coming storm. Extremely partisans fail to realize this because they have no sense of history at all. Anyone with a brain who's looked at the UK military before WWII knows they were weak, both in manpower and in kit.



    Excuse me if I don't actually believe you on this. You'll have to cite a reputable source, not some random blog you found in a dark corner of the internet. Second, how was Chamberlain to know this? You are blaming him for not acting with a vastly unready, poorly equipped force on something he knew nothing about. That makes you look extremely unreasonable. While we're at it, why don't we blame everything on the British soldier who couldn't bring himself to shoot an unarmed Hitler in WWI? Clearly he failed us all by not stopping Hitler. Of course he didn't know what would happen and shooting unarmed men is entirely without honor, but let's blame him because we know what he didn't. Jesus, you are one of the least reasonable people here.



    Way to completely ignore what actually happened. And Churchill won on the military Chamberlain ordered. You forget that. Because you are an extreme partisan.
    It was all a part of Chamberlain's master plan? Um...
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 20 of 23 FirstFirst ... 101819202122 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •