Then prepare to be *empired* upon.
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:50 AM, "Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: America does not need nor can afford "empires." On 09/09/2014 08:02 PM, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote: >That's why we needed a residual force in Iraq. They, the Iraqis, were >developing the skills while we were there. We backed them up and gave them the >confidence they needed to get it done. The average Iraqi soldier doesn't trust >or have faith in their own commanders unless there are American commanders >over seeing an operation with American soldiers to back them up if needed. We >left too early and created a vacuum. ISIS filled it. The same fate awaits >Afghanistan. American lives and treasure have been waisted. Bush forecast this >very event if we left too early.Extremist would take over and we would spend >even more lives and treasure to take it back in order to prevent something >worse. Obama should get on his knees and beg General McCrystal and General >David Petraeus to come back and restore what they had accomplished, hopefully >with a greater coalition. > > > >On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 7:35 PM, mailto:jr_...@yahoo.com[FairfieldLife] >mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > > >Richard, > > >As mentioned by the US generals, the US cannot win the war against ISIS by air >power alone. It still needs military boots on the ground to drive away the >militants from Iraq. The military boots should not be coming from American >soldiers. The military boots should be from the Iraqi forces. It is their >country and they should be defending it. > > > >---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mailto:punditster@... wrote : > > >On 9/9/2014 11:11 AM, Bhairitu noozguru@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: > > >> >>>The US funded the Mujahideen to fight against the Russians in Afghanistan. >>>Why? Because greedy US businessmen wanted their hands on the recently >>>revealed to the public rich resources in the Afghanistan (which was why >>>Russians were there in the first place). Then the Mujahideen because >>>Al-Qaeda and a new boogeyman to get the American people in a "war mood" and >>>support spending heavily on defense which of course profited the military >>>industrial complex. Then the US supported ISIS to help overthrow the Syrian >>>government. Now they are the new boogeyman to drum up more defense >>>spending. Best way to defeat ISIS was to not support them in the first >>>place. >>> > >>The past is already gone, you need to face the present. The best way to defeat ISIS is to vote for the political candidate that will be willing to fund the U.S. military. The the only way to defeat ISIS is with U.S. military air power. That's what President Obama is already doing. Without U.S. military air support, the European and Middle Eastern governments will NOT be able to defeat ISIS. It's not complicated. >>> >> >> >>>On 09/08/2014 07:34 PM, jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: >>> >>> >>>>It's the formation of a new government in Iraq, according to Kerry. IMO, >>>>this indeed is the most reasonable of all approaches, along with the >>>>necessary support from world governments to defeat ISIS. >>>> >>>> >>>>https://news.yahoo.com/kerry-heads-mideast-talks-islamic-state-180834352.html >>>> >>> >> > >
