Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: T0J0 on February 21, 2007, 09:51:24 AM
-
Just a thought\Discussion
With the 2008 election nearing wouldn't it be prudent for Rep. leadership to understand that pulling troops out before the election no matter what the outcome would be the only strategy possible to even entertain a winning RNC candidate even as remote a chance as it seems now.. Doesn't it also seem that Blair's choice to start pulling out is a prelude to american troop withdrawals in the next 6-12 months... So this buildup currently being escalated is in preparation to a withdrawal plan I assume to be announced very soon?!
Stabalize and move out before the election, before the dems grandstand a candidate on the war and cut and run, what will be thier platform when we cut and ran before they had a chance too?
TJ
-
kinda sad you see those young peoples' lives as political tools.
-
Originally posted by Furious
kinda sad you see those young peoples' lives as political tools.
you mean as it has been done going back to cain and able?
-
It must be OK then.
-
And when the enemy realizes they can bully the US knowing that our leaders are to weak to protect us then that will encourage them to to start hitting us State side again. But the democrats want more attacks on the US so they can pass more laws and take away more of our rights.
-
Ok, not ok, whatever. It's the way it is and the way it's always been. Storch gets it.
-
I think the only ones who should have any say in this matter are the troops that are over there. If a majority of them feel like it's a hopeless cause, then I say it's time they come home.
-
Xargos,
That is a very foolish sentiment. The troops took an oath to do what they are doing, following the orders of the officers appointed above them and the CIVILIAN authority as per the constitution.
The military is not, by design and intent of the framers, in a position to determine policy. I understand the feeling you have however it is not appropriate for our democratic republic govt. form.
-
If the Democrats are using the excuse that too many of our soldiers are dying then I say that gives the soldiers the right to decide, otherwise I have to agree with you. The military should never rule but when the civilian government give the military an objective the civilian government should not interfere with the military until the job is done, even Sun Tzu knew that 4000 years ago. The military should be allowed to use all of its weapons, even its NUKEs and use of torture. If there is no reason they should be able to use everything, then there was no need to call upon them in the first place. This limited warfare stuff is BS.
P.S. I believe in the theory of "Walk softly but carry a big stick". The way our civilian rulers have been using our military we look like nothing but a big bully to the rest of the world. They should FEAR us, not resent us.
-
Originally posted by Furious
kinda sad you see those young peoples' lives as political tools.
Your reading to much into the question.... Your kidding yourself if you dont realize that my scenario has been thought of or discussed by many in washington at this point...
-
oh i realize it. just surprised it doesn't piss more people off. that it is ok as long as their "team" wins.
our military should be used to ensure our nations security, not to get some ******* votes.
-
It all makes sense when you look at it from the perspective of Mel Brook's "Blazing Saddles" (1974)
Governor William J. Le Petomane: "We've gotta protect our phoney baloney jobs, gentlemen! Harumph!...Harumph!... Harumph!....
-
mongo like sheriff bart.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
The troops took an oath to do what they are doing, following the orders of the officers appointed above them and the CIVILIAN authority as per the constitution.
Just goes to show - there's a sucker born every minute.