Christians have been genocided in Iraq. This is the fruit of Globalists in Iraq.
Please refrain from quoting deep state trolling points on Obama and Iraq.
Al Jezeera was caught faking gas attacks in Syria last time around:
Posted on 04/17/2018 8:35:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
agreed - Trump the candidate was correct in saying we squandered trillions and only made things worse.
Christians have been genocided in Iraq. This is the fruit of Globalists in Iraq.
Please refrain from quoting deep state trolling points on Obama and Iraq.
Al Jezeera was caught faking gas attacks in Syria last time around:
It could be worse with Iran being a sponsor of terrorism and an emerging nuclear power. However, I do remember writing about the celebrated “Arab Spring” that the alternative to these secular dictatorships would most likely be radical religious terrorist factions. Russia without Iran if it behaved like the old Soviet Union could be manageable.
I will always have a hard time understanding the Russian/Iranian connection. How a country with a multi-millennial paranoia about the intention of neighbors would tolerate Putin helping Iran become a nuclear power is beyond me?
Syria has been an Iranian dominated country under Assad for years. What’s the big rush to change it out for Syrian rebels?
“Given that our economy is inseparable from the global economy, we have no choice but to be concerned about the critical straits and canals through which global commerce travels, and the airports throughout the world through which people can reach our shores in less than a day. “
That is the full, and complete logic by which the author asserts the US has an interest in Syria, any interest.
A laughable reach.
“Islamic terrorism is a absolutely a national security threat and ignoring it won’t make it go away. “
It’s mostly insignificant.
“Combating the Iranian-Russian-Syria alliance is also in the national interest but it ignores that fact that the alternatives to Assad are the greater evil. “
How is that in our national interest?
I contend US interests are best served by Assad achieving complete control over the entirety of Syrian territory.
It’s the only real interest we have there.
I would do exactly that (of course, that was NOT Obama's policy), with the proviso that any attacks originating from a terrorist hosting state would be replied to with massive force, nuclear weapons not excluded, at a time and place of our choosing.
+1
It's much worse than that.
It's an argument for an American military government over all the unruly areas of the planet, in perpetuity. Not, I presume, with Mr. Seekandfind in uniform.
One of the underlying factors in the Middle East that has driven U.S. policy for decades has been the protection of the Suez Canal as a shipping lane. Our interests in that strategic asset prompted us to do several things that would seem outlandish by any measure:
1. The U.S. actually sided with Egypt and the Soviet Union in the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956 -- against Israel, Great Britain and France.
2. The U.S. also orchestrated the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the 1979 peace accords between Egypt and Israel to ensure that the Sinai Peninsula would be returned to Egypt.
The overriding concern in all of this was our interest in keeping the Suez Canal open for trade (1956) and out of a militarized zone between two countries (1979).
Wrong. Syria is not our fight. That doesn’t matter to the globalists, because they haven’t found a war they couldn’t profit from.
You're not aware of the threat Iran poses to the nation?
I don't think an Iranian ally has our best interest at heart. Or the Russians. It's pretty ridiculous to claim that even if Assad might be the lesser evil.
After 9/11 the nation didn't think so. After ISIS committed multiple terrorist against Americans, the nation didn't think so.
Did you miss the part of the campaign where Trump promised to wipe ISIS off the face of earth? Obviously, he knew that was one of the things his base wanted to see happen.
It's insane not to be vigilant against Islamic terrorism.
No, he didn't. All intelligence reports said Saddam had WMD. All prominent Democrats agree.
Just because going to Iraq was a mistake and Bush was a failed President, doesn't make him evil and part of some conspiracy.
Put up or shut up and give us a post where you said that at the time.
Ninety percent of the nation and all prominent conservatives except Pat Buchanan supported the Iraq.
I guarantee you did, too. Get off your damn high horse.
President Jacques Chirac disagrees with you regarding Bush’s motives for war.
(Which matched some of Condi’s odd religious statements about fulfilling ancient prophecies at that time)
Chirac wrote that he was so perplexed by Bush’s words that they needed to go to war in Iraq because it was all about “Gog and Magog” - Chirac had to hire a Bible expert to explain it all to him.
So argue with Chirac, not me.
These are crazed RINO Globalists, who think they can game the Bible, while God sits on His throne and “laughs with derision”.
Yes, Christians and conservatives supported the war in Iraq, because the internet was nothing as it is today and information where we could easily fact check was simply not available. Not that they would have made the information available. So your argument is bogus.
Personally, the fact that BushRove funded Planned Parenthood for the full eight years while lying about it is most disgusting, but there is no way for us to have known that at the time, and we cannot be held morally accountable for voting for him.
You do understand the issue of Damascus in the Bible and therefore, why Damascus is an issue for these crazed RINO Globalists?
And the Iraq war was not just a “mistake”. Three trillion dollars of our blood and national treasure was spent on it, while it enabled the Christian genocide of 600,000 in Iraq today.
So stop with the warmongering for the Uniparty.
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.