Posted on 06/14/2019 7:43:19 AM PDT by rintintin
It is not my point to advocate military action nor is it my point that we should absolutely refrain from military action. My idea is that we identify America's national interests and decide whether they are worth military action and at what cost.
The reply is an attempt to consider both of those questions.
The conclusion is yours, you have expressed it well.
My belief is no country should go to at without the goal of utterly obliterating the enemy. Destroy her will to fight, demolish their war machines, buildings and infrastructure, kill as many of them as possible so they and the world will understand that trifling with us can never work to their advantage.
Whoever came up with the policy of “proportionate response” to aggression is the world's biggest moron. If an enemy swats us with a feather, we need to drop a mountain on them with the promise of doubling our response next time.
Will the world think us insane, blood thirsty Savage? Yup, but they will think long and very hard before they attempt to harm us.the only caveat is we must never be the one to strike first.
My belief is no country should go to at without the goal of utterly obliterating the enemy. Destroy her will to fight, demolish their war machines, buildings and infrastructure, kill as many of them as possible so they and the world will understand that trifling with us can never work to their advantage.
Whoever came up with the policy of “proportionate response” to aggression is the world's biggest moron. If an enemy swats us with a feather, we need to drop a mountain on them with the promise of doubling our response next time.
Will the world think us insane, blood thirsty Savage? Yup, but they will think long and very hard before they attempt to harm us.the only caveat is we must never be the one to strike first.
That is a good idea. Mysteriously vanishing subs also provide scavenging Barracudas with a free meal
Fox is not a purist conservative site.
By harping on the names suggested you clearly indicate you are interested in being spoon fed conservative propaganda like CNN propagates leftwing propaganda.
The reason there is no such site is because the numbers is inadequate to support the costs.
Roger Ailes was a super conservative who realized that simple fact when he created Fox News
They aren’t worth any action nor any cost unless and until there is credible evidence of imminent attack.
And to *ME* that means evidence good enough to convict of murder in a court of law.
An attack on American assets, retaliate, and retaliate with sufficient force to ensure 100% elimination of the threat (and demonstrate what our retribution looks like); beyond that, not our circus, not our monkeys.
The purpose of our military is to guard our borders, and until we can and begin to do that the form and actions of any other government anywhere aren’t worth one taxpayer cent or drop of American blood.
Your points are also well expressed, thank you.
Was Germany's heavy water experiments a threat to us? They did not have the bomb either, they were trying and, given time, they might well have got there.
I don't think Nazi Germany has much more to do with the current situation then did Saddam Hussein's Iraq, except as I mentioned in my reply, but nuclear weapons in anybody's hands is always a threat to our national interest.
When mounted on ICBMs, doubly so, and the idea of defending borders as a means of national safety becomes 20th century nostalgia.
Whether that situation requires military action must be carefully judged, it is not a matter subject to axiom.
Wasn’t a sub. These were Limpet mines attached while the ships were in Iranian ports. Watch the video of Iranians taking a mine off a tanker while at sea.
After Trump, our situation may become so dire we will pray it’s the Chinese.
Until a warship is sunk, don’t get involved. Let the tanker flag nation take action.
Title should read:
Iran’s aggression may cause their munitions stockpiles to spontaneously explode!
Remember Israel and Iran’s Nuke paperwork...
I understand that you sit in your underwear (or depends) glued to Faux day-in and day-out, but they really are owned, manipulated or paid for by multi-nationalists, globalist and two Australian enviro-fascist lefties.
And yes, they really are, deservedly, bleeding viewership very, very badly. They won't mention it, but it's happening. Now.
As their biggest fanboy, I can see why facts like these would upset you, but still, it's all true, nonetheless.
The last Presidents who were allowed to win a war were FDR & Truman. Maybe that's why they are still considered the greatest generation.
No it wasn’t. Hawaii was not a state at the time. It was however an assault of aggression without a declaration of war.
WTF
Yes, saw that. I wasn’t recommending it as a like for like counter attack.
You are a deluded purist incapable of intellectually understanding or comprehending anything out side your very narrow and dogmatic view of the world.
And that is exactly why the President is proceeding with non-military actions like sanctions and economic pressures. Other much less obvious exchanges may already going on in the background, not enough to be declared an "act of war", but plenty to let the Iranians know we are onto them.
It would be MUCH more simple to let the the other nations in the Middle East, most particularly Saudi Arabia, engage the Iranians directly, and the US only coming to their aid, much as the US came to the aid of Great Britain, and declared war on Germany only after its Axis partner, Imperial Japan, crunched our Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor.
Do not wake the sleeping giant.
This is the challenge with our Constitution. Foreign powers can simply "wait out" our Commander In Chief and help elect one they like.
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.
