Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mburbank
You make my argument for us leaving. They don't have a tiny stake, they have the ONLY legitimate stake. IF we could set up an actual international coalition with us doing some funding but no killing, the insurgents would loose the steady stream of recruits we provide them with.
|
The insurgents are going to keep getting recruits because there will always be a
minority of people who want to fuck things up and push their extremist agenda.
Whether it's us there, the UN there, or a bunch of other nations there, there will be "insurgents." it isn't a give and take, IMO. They need to be defeated, regardless of who is there. So then the question is who is best able to get it done, us, or the UN? Us, or the untrained Iraqi army? We want full involvement from these bodies, but we can't assume that they could currently
replace our presence there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ziggy
My point was this administration "does not care about polls" so liberals bitching should the last excuse they have for not getting something done.
|
So you then would support us if we were to tell the folks writing this constitution that it must exclude Islamic law from it?
Quote:
|
The reason we haven't taken "a more strong-armed approach in writing the constitution, building the army, etc.," is because that is not the administration's goal.
|
Writing the constitution, getting an army trained, isn't the goal? Then what is?
Threaded Mode
