Skip to comments.
Iranian Warships Arrive Near Yemen
THE WASHINGTON FREE BEACON ^
| 04/22/15
| ADAM CREDO
Posted on 04/22/2015 10:09:50 AM PDT by mulder1
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
To: onedoug
“At least the ROEs were clearer then. These days, under hussein, they seem more like theyre designed for the muslim Navy.”
What better way to “downsize” the Navy than to let a few
ships get sunk.
81
posted on
04/23/2015 6:26:15 AM PDT
by
Slambat
To: SMARTY
>>O is sleepwalking into a leaf shredder
Probably a habit he got from his hash-Oil days.
82
posted on
04/23/2015 6:54:10 AM PDT
by
HLPhat
(This space is intentionaly blank.)
To: MinorityRepublican
Assad’s a Baathist, so was Saddam Hussein. They both created ISIS by funding and supporting and providing safe haven for Zarqawi and Saddam’s general man al Dhouri when they were the main insurgency in Iraq.
83
posted on
04/23/2015 6:58:50 AM PDT
by
piasa
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge)
To: SJackson
84
posted on
04/23/2015 7:04:46 AM PDT
by
HLPhat
(This space is intentionaly blank.)
To: Vermont Lt
"We think that a democracy or republic form of government will work over there."
Not me. A liberal democracy is only going to work with an enlightened people who understand the principles of liberty as set forth by people such as John Locke. Until these countries education system get's reformed, the people will not be ready. True, some of the countries have people ready for a liberal democracy. I think that both Iran and Iraq are two such candidates. However, countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt probably need a strongman. If nothing else, they protect the minorities against the passions of the majority.
"But I think getting ourselves into another mess in the middle east is not in our national interest."
I don't believe preventing Iran from delivering weapons to the Huthis is getting ourselves in another mess. If Iran tries to prevent us from boarding and inspecting their ships (which we have every right to do via the U.N. mandate against arming these rebels) it will be operation Preying Mantass II and it will end the same decisive way. It won't be a mess unless you are talking about the Iranian Navy.
To: Pecos
Barry will say he doesn’t want to sink the Iranian vessels because the ecological impact of fuel/oil leaking from the sunk ships would be bad for the Earth.
What happened to the millions of barrels worth of fuel/oil that was in the ships sunk in WW2?
86
posted on
04/23/2015 7:53:14 AM PDT
by
rfreedom4u
(Chris Stevens won't be running for president.)
To: rfreedom4u
Well, I’m glad he has his priorities straight. /s/
87
posted on
04/23/2015 8:26:11 AM PDT
by
Pecos
(What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.)
To: justa-hairyape
Yep. We there to cover/help Iran. I blame every coward, company owned Republican for this. Every. One. Of. Them.
88
posted on
04/23/2015 8:45:38 AM PDT
by
Lil Flower
(American by birth. Southern by the Grace of God! ROLL TIDE!!)
To: SJackson
“Don’t think they’ve docked, yet.”
According to Fox News, the Iranian ships haven’t docked, changed courses and picked up speed.
89
posted on
04/23/2015 8:52:30 AM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
(When will Sisi, Bibi, King Abdullah & ?, take out Isis in our White House, AG Dept, CIA, & State?)
To: Old Teufel Hunden
Taking the post too personally. By “we” I meant the government and the neocons before this government. Not you or I.
Play this out two or three steps. The Iranians drop off arms. We stop them by shooting at them. Then Iran does what? And to whom? They certainly are not going to attack us.
This is a chess game. You are playing checkers.
The other issue here is that we simply do not have the ability to project power in the Middle East AND Europe AND the Pacific. Pick one, or two, but not three. Which one of those do you want to lose.
We import a small amount of oil from the Gulf. I suggest we lose that area instead of the other two.
To: Vermont Lt
Well, it looks as if from the latest reports that the Iranian ships have turned around. As for where we should put our assets, I have long advocated that we need to pull out our Army forces from Europe. Just keep the air and naval bases. Western Europe should be able to protect herself. When do we push the baby away from the tit? She’s 70 years old now... (end of WWII)
To: Old Teufel Hunden
Again, we are in agreement. (Probably in 99% of things!)
I think its more like 25 years. We needed troops there to offset the Soviet threat. But since then we have missed an opportunity to withdraw.
The problem now is that it would be impractical for Germany especially to rearm and grow enough to support the continent. And really, who thinks a strongly armed Germany is a good idea?
To: Grampa Dave
So we went from two Iranian Destroyers docked in Yemen, to 2 Frigate’s and 5 Cargo ships heading back up to Oman. Looks like the over land route is plan B. Oman is neutral with Iranian leanings. Or perhaps the Arabs saying screw you and restarting the bombing, demonstrated to Iran that the Arabs are no longer on our leash.
93
posted on
04/23/2015 11:14:24 AM PDT
by
justa-hairyape
(The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
To: Vermont Lt
"And really, who thinks a strongly armed Germany is a good idea?"
I do, they are our allies. This isn't the Weimar republic. They are a stable democracy that are in no danger of being taken over by a Hitler. Same with Japan, I think they should be re-arming themself and taking more of these duties to protect themselves. These nations would rather have us doing it because it saves them a tremendous amount of money. We can't afford it anymore. These nations need to start taking on more of their responsibility for their protection. NATO charter says that all of it's members are supposed to be spending 2% of their GDP on defense. We are like the only ones that do it. It's time for other NATO members to step up to the plate. During the Soviet Union era they did. They have fallen off drastically since then.
To: piasa
Assads a Baathist, so was Saddam Hussein. They both created ISIS by funding and supporting and providing safe haven for Zarqawi and Saddams general man al Dhouri when they were the main insurgency in Iraq.That's all in the past. Now ISIS wants Assad dead so they can slaughter all the Alawites, Christians and other Minorities in Syria.
To: Old Teufel Hunden
NATO charter says that all of it's members are supposed to be spending 2% of their GDP on defense. We are like the only ones that do it. It's time for other NATO members to step up to the plate. During the Soviet Union era they did. They have fallen off drastically since then.Let the Euroweenies be conquered by the Russians
To: musicman
Rasputin has the Royal Flush of Clubs.
97
posted on
04/23/2015 1:51:26 PM PDT
by
MaxMax
(Call the local GOP and ask how you can support CRUZ for POTUS, Make them talk!)
To: Starboard
“They see weakness. They see indecision. They see opportunity.”
And guys like us always wind up pulling the chestnuts out of the fire caused by weak leaders.
98
posted on
04/23/2015 4:13:05 PM PDT
by
Forty-Niner
(The barely bare berry bear formerly known as Arctos Horribilis.)
To: Forty-Niner
Yep, conservatives are only wanted when there’s a mess to clean up. And then, after things start getting back on track, we’re criticized for not doing a better job and the liberals are back in charge.
To: Old Teufel Hunden
Yeah, I kind of meant that tongue in cheek. Should have put a smiley after it or something.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson