Posted on 12/14/2006 6:06:40 AM PST by alex
It's time to call Riyadh's bluff.
Having made whores of innumerable politicians on both sides of the aisle in Washington, the Saudis still hope to steer American policy the way they did before their citizens attacked us on 9/11.
Now they demand American protection for those Iraqis who have done their best to kill our troops, instigate a religious civil war, slaughter the innocent and destroy any hope Iraq has of a better future.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I agree that we leave, but not until we have finished what we set out to do in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'd say he's flat out wrong, and this is his key mistake.
This is similar to Korea with the Chicoms, Afghanistan with the US, and on and on thru history.
All thats happening here is that the Iranians have picked disgruntled Iraqis and given them arms, training, supplies and support.
That should be an act of war against the US. But for political reasons, just like Truman, we refuse to admit that.
We are already at war with Iran.
Fortunately our President understands this, and we are not leaving before the complete victory.
Agree 100%.
So this journalist is suggesting that we take the side of the 10% of the Moslems in the world against the other 90%?
Instead, I think we are doing things the right way already. That is, supporting each nation's *majority* right to rule.
In Iraq, this means that the Shiites should rule, yet respect their Sunni minority. In Syria, just the opposite, that the Sunnis majority should rule, yet not terribly oppress the Alawite Shiite minority that currently oppresses them. We even believe that because there is no clear majority in Lebanon, that their best future lies in a majority coalition.
So what does this bode for the future of Iraq? It is unlikely that the Sunnis will be entirely expelled from the country. That form of "ethnic cleansing" is generally not the way of the Middle East. However, the Sunnis will have to be punished, both for their past crimes, and so that they are fully aware that they are a minority.
Indeed, many will leave the country, heading to Jordan and Saudi Arabia, where they will be greeted by their Sunni brethren. But eventually things will settle down, with much the same sectarian breakdown as is found throughout the Middle East.
Truman actually fired McCarthur for that, didn't he?
It does not mean that we should not use our military here and there but the goal should be our own interests and not the stabilization of some sheiks who are incapable to appreciate our effort.
Me, too. On June 29, 1950, Truman announced that the US would be getting involved in "police action" against bandits.
One major difference between Truman's "War" and Bush's "War" is the number of US deaths.
Within 2 months of Truman's announcement thousands of American troops were dead in Korea. By the time Truman left office, 2 1/2 year later, 30,000 US troops had died.
On just one day, November 30, 1950 -- 781 Americans died for Korea's freedom
Those who can't remember history . . .
I know a few Ds, and every time I bring up other conflicts they say, "you can't compare this war to those . . ."
So they take this conflict out of context. No perspective.
The Saudis don't like us either. They think they have made a deal with the devil. They can eat sand.
Front page of Syracuse Herald-Journal -- December 1, 1950
Gen. Douglas MacArthur said today that his United Nations forces are fighting in Korea against military odds without precedent in history, and warned that failure to meet the Red challenge there will leave it to "be fought, and possibly lost, on the battlefieds of Europe."Will the Europeans ever grow up?As to the opinion in Europe, the general said: "There appears to be a general failure, intentional or from misinformation, to comprehend the mission prescribed for this command by resolutions of the United Nations of which their governments were joint architects and directors, or fairly to recognize that in success or adversity this command has proceeded unerringly in compliance with controlling policies and directives."
MacArthur said he could only attribute such comment to a "somewhat selfish, though most short-sighted, viewpoint.[snip]
"The issue is a global one and failure to comprehend this fact carries the germs of freedom's ultimate destruction. If the fight is not waged with courage and invincible determination to meet the challenge here, it will indeed be fought and possibly lost, on the battlefields of Europe."
"Agree 100%."
We are also in a cold war with Saudi Arabia. They have financed the intellectual infiltration of our media, our universities and our government. Powerful advisers and diplomats have been Islamic apologists for many years now. Even after 9/11, the situation is worsening.
Too bad that the political battle about Florida election results (in Nov/Dec 2000) obscured MSM coverage of the 50th anniversary of the first year of the Korean "Conflict."
I like to compare Iraq to Korea. Our efforts in Korea gave freedom to millions for 50 years.
I think something is going on and it has Saudi involvement. I'll sit back on this one another 6 weeks.
In regards to your suggestions let them take control of oil resources because to “alternative sources of energy” it is a pathetic and shockingly stupid idea. What can you do if the terrorists control the oil resources of the Middle East today, how are you going to run you car, or run many power plant, or run the factories, etc… Do you think that we can find an effective alternate source of energy and transform the whole economy to be bases don these new sources in matter of few days? If scientists find the ultimate source of alternative energy today, it will take us at least 20 years to shift the economy form dependence on oil. In the meanwhile if the terrorists control the oil sources of the Middle and black mail us with oil, we will go into a depression hundreds time worst than that of 1929, and not just us but the whole world will suffer the same fate.
Moreover if they control the oil resources of the Middle East, they can use the hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues to acquire the most destructive weapons including nuclear bombs, and recruits thousands of people worldwide to kill us.
Yes he did.
I just pray to God that we have special ops making cross border runs into Iran and causing maximum damage.
I am sorry but simply could not put an American MP on every crossroad in the world and the world would not appreciate even if we would do it. IMHO, there is no point in fighting for these morons - we have to supply our friends with cheap quality arms and this should be it with regard to overseas situation.
And one more thing, we have to respond each and every terrorist attacks by brutal force of our choice, but it is a pointless exercise to stabilize Muslim World and be engaged in the nation building over there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.