Is Obama finished?

[apk919]

Originally Posted by NMRJock

You finally found somebody that agrees with you!

[ezmoney]

Will the people who oppose the war in Iraq please answer these questions.

1.If we pull the troops out of Iraq where do you propose that we send them?

2. What will their new mission be?

3. Will we continue "the war on terror", if so where will we fight and against who?

4. Tell me how much money we will save. We'll still have the military and we'll still be paying to deploy them somewhere else.

Instead of just constantly telling us what we shouldn't be doing tell us what we should be doing, be specific.

I can't wait to hear your answers!!

[climb4fun]

Originally Posted by apk919

Wrong.



Wrong again.



That in itself is not a reason to stop a war. If the Nazis or the Japanese used roadside bombs, would you have demanded we "leave" WWII?



That happens every day no matter what. Soldiers also die in training missions in the US. Shall we stop training soldiers?



Your opinion... nothing more.



Since it's printed in a "paper", it must be true!



Is he smart? He hasn't said anything that proves his intelligence yet...



Wrong again.



Is this just another one of your anti-American fantasies?

Wow! You do have an answer to everyone for their every single opinion.

Have you ever thought about not driving your Lotus for a while, and maybe go to the war zone (Iraq, Afghanistan, ..) and help american soldiers fighting terrorism in military way?

[Brennon]

Originally Posted by ezmoney

Will the people who oppose the war in Iraq please answer these questions.

1.If we pull the troops out of Iraq where do you propose that we send them?

2. What will their new mission be?

3. Will we continue "the war on terror", if so where will we fight and against who?

4. Tell me how much money we will save. We'll still have the military and we'll still be paying to deploy them somewhere else.

Instead of just constantly telling us what we shouldn't be doing tell us what we should be doing, be specific.

I can't wait to hear your answers!!

First time I've looked at this thread...and I'm not an obama (or clinton) supporter. I'm a Republican, but here goes...


1. Home

2. Protect this country (namely our boders)

3. No. It's akin to a war on drugs. You cannot beat an ideology.

4. A lot. Why deploy them elsewhere? Why do we need troops in Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. Bring them home. Bases around the world wastes money and angers other nations. Canada and Switzerland don't have this problem.

[Rob T]

Originally Posted by climb4fun

Wow! You do have an answer to everyone for their every single opinion.

Have you ever thought about not driving your Lotus for a while, and maybe go to the war zone (Iraq, Afghanistan, ..) and help american soldiers fighting terrorism in military way?

I always find it amusing how liberals don't think you can really support the war effort unless you do the fighting yourself.

[Brennon]

Originally Posted by Rob T

I always find it amusing how liberals don't think you can really support the war effort unless you do the fighting yourself.

I've always found it amusing that conversatives think supporting war efforts is a conservative value? Since when? Circa 2000?

[Rob T]

Originally Posted by Brennon

I've always found it amusing that conversatives think supporting war efforts is a conservative value? Since when? Circa 2000?

Uh...who said it was?

[II-soon]

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by apk919

Is he smart? He hasn't said anything that proves his intelligence yet...

Standardized tests aren't proof enough? He has to write a Gettysburg Address for you to admit he's a bright guy?

Or maybe you're looking for something more like Bush:

"Fool me once, shame on... err... you... fool- uh... fool me twice... uh... can't get fooled again."

[smoseley]

By the way, on the topic of Iraq....

I had a new employee who was working for me for about two months, who was a 32 year-old Army veteran and had served in Iraq a few years back. He didn't have much bad to say about his time in active duty. He's a really idealistic person who loves his country and served the best way he knew how - by risking his life to help make the world a better place for the future.

He served his time, and was in inactive reserves, and had established a career and a life after the Army as a software developer. He was one of the better programmers I've worked with, with a really great work ethic. I really respected him and his work.

Last month, he got called back into active duty (from the inactive reserves), and is currently in training in Chile. The Army is sending him back to Iraq for another year. Including training, they're taking another 18 months of his life. Total bull****. The look in his eyes the last time I saw him was one of a child who finds out that Santa Claus isn't real. Anguish, disgust, depression, and inexplicable loss. But that look on a grown man's face leaves you speechless.

[ezmoney]

Originally Posted by Brennon

First time I've looked at this thread...and I'm not an obama (or clinton) supporter. I'm a Republican, but here goes...


1. Home

2. Protect this country (namely our boders)

3. No. It's akin to a war on drugs. You cannot beat an ideology.

4. A lot. Why deploy them elsewhere? Why do we need troops in Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. Bring them home. Bases around the world wastes money and angers other nations. Canada and Switzerland don't have this problem.

We could bring them all home but if Iran takes over Iraq or tries to make good on its threats to destroy Isreal we would have to redeploy. If we allow the flow of oil from the middle east to be interrupted we will be looking at a depression not just a recession. We could never allow Iran to attempt the the destruction of Isreal. Isreal has the sixth largest nuclear arsenel in the world. If forced to use them the end result would be unimaginable. Even if Iran made a first strike Israel has retaliatory capabilities (nuclear submarines etc.). It is estimated a retaliatory strike would kill 30 million in Iran.

There is something called The Posse Comitatus Act which prevents us from using the military from guarding the borders except against acts of war by an outside power. You can argue about this but our government has refused to use the military for border patrol.

The ideology you refer to is trying to kill us, and has had some sucess over the last 20 or so years. Using drugs is a matter of lack of personal responsibility. People make a choice to use drugs and so because of the demand and the amount of money that can be made others choose to supply the drugs. The almost 3000 people killed on 9/11 were not responsible for getting themselves murdered. We had our heads in the sand for a long time while they waged war against us. We were awakened on 9/11 to the reality that we were really in a war. Trying to hide from this again will only get alot more of us killed in the future. We can beat them.

Canada and Switzerland are not the worlds super power, like it or not we are. We've made commitments to various nations to help protect them or for reasons that are in our interests. If we were not in these nations we could never deploy troops to various regions of the world quickly. We have alot of strategic interests in other parts of the globe.

We can't make foreign policy based on what angers other nations. Our foreign policy has to be based on what's best for us. Try to live your life pleasing other people and see how far it gets you. You'll never be happy and you'll never please everyone. The same is true for nations on a much larger scale. BTW name some (any) nations that conduct their foreign policy to please us. If we turn our backs on other nations after pledging to support them (i.e. Iraq) no one will ever trust us. You don't make friends by not keeping your word.

[LARRY]

Originally Posted by climb4fun

Wow! APK919! You do have an answer to everyone for their every single opinion.

Have you ever thought about not driving your Lotus for a while, and maybe go to the war zone (Iraq, Afghanistan, ..) and help american soldiers fighting terrorism in military way?

[ivan1]

Originally Posted by LARRY

way to chime in on a personal attack

[ezmoney]

Originally Posted by smoseley

By the way, on the topic of Iraq....

I had a new employee who was working for me for about two months, who was a 32 year-old Army veteran and had served in Iraq a few years back. He didn't have much bad to say about his time in active duty. He's a really idealistic person who loves his country and served the best way he knew how - by risking his life to help make the world a better place for the future.

He served his time, and was in inactive reserves, and had established a career and a life after the Army as a software developer. He was one of the better programmers I've worked with, with a really great work ethic. I really respected him and his work.

Last month, he got called back into active duty (from the inactive reserves), and is currently in training in Chile. The Army is sending him back to Iraq for another year. Including training, they're taking another 18 months of his life. Total bull****. The look in his eyes the last time I saw him was one of a child who finds out that Santa Claus isn't real. Anguish, disgust, depression, and inexplicable loss. But that look on a grown man's face leaves you speechless.

I feel sympathy for your employee. I have a friend whose youngest son may be facing the same thing. He just finished his active duty with the marines (last week). He served back to back tours in Iraq. His unit has been redeployed to Afganistan and he may me called back in to go. Being a soldier during time of war is no fun. I served from Jan 1966 to Dec 1968 so I know the drill.

BTW please tell me that there really is a Santa Claus!

[JWA]

Originally Posted by smoseley

He served his time, and was in inactive reserves...

I'm sure that it was an unwelcomed development, but isn't that how the reserves work? Whether inactive or active, if you're in the reserves haven't you chosen to be in the program and been compensated for it? If you want to be completely out with no possibility for being called back you get discharged, right? That's what I'd assume, but I know nothing about it.

[dfa2100]

Originally Posted by JWA

I'm sure that it was an unwelcomed development, but isn't that how the reserves work? Whether inactive or active, if you're in the reserves haven't you chosen to be in the program and been compensated for it? If you want to be completely out with no possibility for being called back you get discharged, right? That's what I'd assume, but I know nothing about it.

This person probably fell under the "separation" category below... basically, decided to go into the inactive reserves rather than stay in the active duty military. And this "decision" is somewhat misleading... sometimes the military forces people to separate regardless of whether they want to stay on active duty or not (generally it isn't the case that they are forced to stay active duty, at least that I have heard of).



------------------
From Wikipedia (Military discharge - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)-

- Military discharge in the United States

An enlisted member of the United States Armed Forces may be relieved of active or reserve duty through one of three methods: separation, discharge, or entry into a commissioning program. While an enlisted member's military service obligation (MSO) is 8 years, the initial enlistment contract itself normally does not exceed 6 years, with the remainder being served in either the reserve component of the service branch under which he or she enlisted, or in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) as an inactive (non-drilling) reservist.

Discharge or separation should not be confused with retirement; career U.S. military members who retire are not separated or discharged; rather, they enter the retired reserve and may be subject to recall to active duty.

- Reasons for discharge

Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of those leaving the service after completing an initial enlistment are separated rather than discharged. The key difference lies in that a discharge completely alleviates the veteran of any unfulfilled military service obligation, whereas a separation (which may be voluntary or involuntary) may leave an additional unfulfilled military service obligation (MSO) to be carried out in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR).

Below are some of the most common reasons for discharge:

* Expiration of Term of Service (ETS)
* Disability, Dependency, or Hardship
* Pregnancy/Parenthood
* Physical or Mental Conditions that interfere with military service
* Convenience of The Government/Secretarial Authority (voluntary redundancy due to funding cutbacks, for example)
* Unsuitability
* Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions
* Entry-Level Performance and Conduct

If discharged for any of the above reasons, the servicemember will normally receive an honorable or a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

[apk919]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Standardized tests aren't proof enough? He has to write a Gettysburg Address for you to admit he's a bright guy?

Or maybe you're looking for something more like Bush:

"Fool me once, shame on... err... you... fool- uh... fool me twice... uh... can't get fooled again."

That's right, standardized tests are not enough. And for the record, I certainly don't think George W. Bush is a genius. BTW, he's not a candidate for President...

[LARRY]

Originally Posted by ivan1

way to chime in on a personal attack

That's all you guys do around here.

Thanks for the compliment.

[LARRY]

Originally Posted by apk919

That's right, standardized tests are not enough. And for the record, I certainly don't think George W. Bush is a genius. BTW, he's not a candidate for President...

By the way, apk919, who are you voting for and why?

I'd just like to know because you seem to be a very savvy political observer....

[apk919]

Originally Posted by LARRY

By the way, apk919, who are you voting for and why?

I'd just like to know because you seem to be a very savvy political observer....

I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards McCain. And, I'll tell you why... for many years, he's been one of the few members of congress who seem to vote their conscience, regardless of the party line. When it comes right down to it, I think he's willing to put the country ahead of his party. His votes, and the legislation that he's sponsored are far more moderate than anyone else who's running. Frankly, anyone who says that McCain is "the third term of W" hasn't been paying attention.

That said, if another candidate comes up with what I believe to be a better plan for our nation's future, they would get my vote.