Self Defense
I seem to be seeing comment, these days, that our primary need is to get our troops out of Iraq. Now, I remember that our objective in Vietnam ended up being getting our troops out. Let's review the results:
Millions of innocent people were killed in Southeast Asia by the victorious communists (especially in Cambodia). Communists started civil wars around he world. Even Jimmy Carter noticed when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.
In short, we ran and a lot of people died.
Today, the point seems to be that we need to make the Iraqis defend themselves ... because we sure don't want to do it. Think about that. Would we want Negroes to defend themselves from racial violation because we Caucasians want to get out of the problem? How many people are we willing to be victimized because we don't want to help them?
To take that a step further, what does military history teach us about countries whose military objective is to run away from the conflict? How much did we worry about casualties in World War 2? When were we going to bring our troops home from Europe or the Pacific? When did we care? We've taken 2,000 casualties in Iraq (but we took 3,000 in the US). We got 50,000 killed in Vietnam -- for nothing. Why were we so unconcerned about the half million dead we got in World War 2?
Don't forget; we get our information from the "press." The "press" is vast majority Democrat -- among those who will admit it. All this war information (and a lot of accompanying analysis) is coming from Democrats. Is their objective winning the war or protecting the people of Iraq ... or the US? No. Their objective is political power, and they think they can get it by losing this war while the president is a Republican. Never forget, when the president was a Democrat, they Democrats kept a criminal in the White House. People loyal to the country, rather than a party, would never have done that.
Keep that in mind every time you hear someone concerned about getting our troops out. There's some other reason for that concern than the war.
Millions of innocent people were killed in Southeast Asia by the victorious communists (especially in Cambodia). Communists started civil wars around he world. Even Jimmy Carter noticed when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.
In short, we ran and a lot of people died.
Today, the point seems to be that we need to make the Iraqis defend themselves ... because we sure don't want to do it. Think about that. Would we want Negroes to defend themselves from racial violation because we Caucasians want to get out of the problem? How many people are we willing to be victimized because we don't want to help them?
To take that a step further, what does military history teach us about countries whose military objective is to run away from the conflict? How much did we worry about casualties in World War 2? When were we going to bring our troops home from Europe or the Pacific? When did we care? We've taken 2,000 casualties in Iraq (but we took 3,000 in the US). We got 50,000 killed in Vietnam -- for nothing. Why were we so unconcerned about the half million dead we got in World War 2?
Don't forget; we get our information from the "press." The "press" is vast majority Democrat -- among those who will admit it. All this war information (and a lot of accompanying analysis) is coming from Democrats. Is their objective winning the war or protecting the people of Iraq ... or the US? No. Their objective is political power, and they think they can get it by losing this war while the president is a Republican. Never forget, when the president was a Democrat, they Democrats kept a criminal in the White House. People loyal to the country, rather than a party, would never have done that.
Keep that in mind every time you hear someone concerned about getting our troops out. There's some other reason for that concern than the war.
posted by Anonymous at 6:29 AM
<<< Home