What evidence is there that we would do anything or even be in a position to do anything. We wouldnt take out Taliban
forces with a drone, we treat these terrorists better than
our own soldiers. The insurgents could be wiped off the map
if the high command so chooses if Bush cant weild a military
to take out a small number of loosely related terror cells in Iraq how can he project power into Iran.
Meanwhile some idiot Admiral is playing kissy face with his
communist counterpart off the coast of California.
Our military seems cowed and ineffective just like the IDF
looked against Hezzbolla. I do agree that Iran wont invade
Iraq offically just yet but not because they are afraid of us.Bush needs to start projecting power in the Arab world
that means killing lots of people and breaking everything.
posted on 09/25/2006 10:51:52 PM PDT
(optional tag-line under reconsideration)
I said nothing about attacking Iran. The premise is If Iran attacks Iraq while we are still there. What would happen? I suggest you take a course in reading comprehension.
In the meantime, The NIE report has only been partially leaked, most likely by the famous Democrats that have access to that report. Based on partial information you cannot assess that we are losing the war.
If this were WWII, you'd be begging for surrender at the beginning of th battle of the Bulge. There we lost close to 80,000 KIA and WIA. Not to mention the atrocities committed by the SS.
I think your wrong and you'd better get a grip on yourself. I personally believe that there is too much political interference from the Democrats in this war. They would rather lose the war and gain power than win it.
posted on 09/26/2006 9:22:15 AM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson