Posted on 09/17/2019 7:42:12 PM PDT by Kazan
If you voted for Trump, you voted for a dramatic increase military spending and the alienation of ISIS and other Islamic terrorist threats.
Clearly our foreign policy is driven by something other than “Islamic terrorism.”
No one is talking about WAR. What is being talked about and planned for is RETALIATION. Punishment. There is a very distinct difference.
And what if the Iranians were not behind the attack? It seems that the finger-pointing at Iran has gone a little quiet.
Preventing another 9/11 wasn't worth it?
One has to be completely crazy not to realize that Islamic terrorist states and groups would conquer the world and this country if they could.
They aren't just going to leave us alone if we ignore them.
He doubled down on stupid and started berating me on the air.
In genuinely shocked that he’s still on the air at all. How does someone host a talk show when he’s a whining jerk with a terrible voice who antagonizes so many of the people who call him? LOL.
What Levin states in this regard is 100% correct.
How our leadership (W and Obama) chose to handcuff our troops is a completely different subject. The ROE was off the charts PC and resulted in 18 years of near futility and needless death and maiming of our troops.
But, that doesn’t change the fact that what Levin states is fact. Because his statement is indeed factual.
Well, I’d say stopping immigrants and visitors from those countries, coupled with Israeli-style flight security measures, would have stopped another 9/11.
So, no, I don’t see any evidence that our trillions and our thousands dead bought anything over what I mention above.
You seem to think the trillions and deaths were a bargain.
Pretty sick of you.
How do you retaliate when you aren’t even the one who was attacked? LOL.
If you try debating him he just says, get off the phone you big dope! Not that there is anything wrong with that. But debating on air never works.
That’s OK for the first step.
But because we are not anxious, and are a patient people, we’ll reserve on the third step for ourselves.
We will not remove Iran from the face of the earth if they don’t do it again.
How can Levin’s statement be “factual” when he’s making a prediction about something that will happen in the future?
“Iran has the go ahead from the globalists because they want to undermine the United States of America and any other country with populist successes against them.”
What in the hell does that mean?
Blockade Iran, Bomb all their ports and oil stations (or let the Saudi’s do it—with our help) Start a rebel movement lead by the Shah’s Son. How about Radio Free Iran? Undermine the Mullahs from within. End piracy with patrols and sink pirate ships.
“Also, just plain leaving the problem to the local powers is perfectly acceptable.”
And the simple bastard claims to be a federalist.
Perhaps we should do one of two things
—Devastate a country and leave
—Be conquerers.
The crap we are doing is not working.
The S400s in Iran might have something to say about that.
“You’d prefer more civilians die here and abroad in Islamic terrorist attacks? “
The numbers are orders of magnitude different.
And, YES, the risible impact of terror is less than the cost of all these wars. By far. In both blood and treasure.
The trouble with Israel is that they will go nuclear if their existence is threatened. So, is it on our best interest to prevent a nuclear war in the mid-East?
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.