Chicago Fine, how did you feel about our military response to 9/11 when we sent our military might into Iraq and Afghanistan ?
Just curious.
By the way, where were you and how old were you on 9/11 ?
Kamala Harris booked exclusive interview with Brett Baier on Fox
- Thread starter TomEric4756
- Start date
Chicago Fine, how did you feel about our military response to 9/11 when we sent our military might into Iraq and Afghanistan ?
Just curious.
By the way, where were you and how old were you on 9/11 ?
I was in 2nd grade on 9/11, my mom was doing school drop offs for the three of us when we first heard over the radio.
I fully supported the invasion of Afghanistan and subsequently Iraq.
That’s about what I think of adults who supported it at the time and those who still do. They have the emotional maturity and foresight of a second grader.
On both Iraq and Afghanistan?
Clearly Iraq was wrong. I don't see options to Afghan, do we really let a nation harbor someone who staged a major attack on our soil?
Now invading, overthrowing, leaving should have been an option.
Finally faced with hard questions on border, Harris has no answers - Washington Examiner
Kamala Harris finally faced probing and persistent questions about her record as vice president and plans for the presidency in an interview with Bret Baier.
www.washingtonexaminer.com
“The key takeaway is not that she did not answer the question, even though she did not. The key takeaway is that there are no answers that would help Harris politically. The facts are what they are.”
Chicago Fine, appreciate your honest and frank response.
Remember going to the bank on 9/11. A trembling teller told me Indianapolis would soon be under attack.
Asked her why, She firmly replied, "Because we have Eli Lilly and Naval Avionics here".
My point being, the entire country was in a panic subject to wanting our leaders to do something.
Early on our leaders had high ratings for the military response in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The same leaders who are now in retrospect (Monday Morning Quarterbacking) held in low regard for wasting money and men.
Iraq was wrong. Unless Saddam unleashes a smart bomb of gas in the US and kills thousands. Then what does the media say about Bush? What does history say?
It's always easy to Monday morning quarterback when we don't know what unfolds in the alternative timeline.
I supported Bush in Iraq here on this board. But when it turned out the WMDs were our stupidity in buying Curveball's story, I switched.
Why would Saddam attack the US? His chief fear was Iran, Iraq barely survived their war. Saddam knew another war would result in an Iranian decapitating him with a dull spoon.
We did not give him tremendous amounts of weaponry in their war, but we gave them dual use equipment and farm credits. In a war like that, every little bit counts
Saddam was not a religious fanatic, he had no belief he was fighting a holy war against the US. He knew he would not survive another war against us, either we would get him or we would leave his army so weak the dull spoon could walk in.
He was a very bad man, but he didn't believe he had superpowers nor faith in 72 virgins. He had no interest in tangling with us again. He only did it the first time because he did not think we would respond. He would be free from that thought by attacking us.
Chris Wallace has proved what a great journalist he is, hasn't he? He's whiffed after he left Fox because he was a joke.
He was so in the bag for the Democrats, it wasn't funny. He lived on his dad's reputation for so long and finally everyone saw him for what he was - a phony.
If he's the best, why doesn't he have a regular show?
The media believed it - MAGA didn't. The media believes any negative rumor about Trump and nothing negative about Democrats.
It's nothing new.
Ok. You're arguing the reasons not to go to war. But you don't know what today would be like if we hadn't. You have absolutely zero idea. None. Zilch. Nada. I gave one example of infinite possibilities if we hadn't gone.
My point isn't to debate the war, but to state you don't know that it was "clearly wrong" as you don't know the results of the other infinite possibilities.
You'd do the same, if you were Zelensky. Having nukes has proven to be THE main deterrent to attacks.Cheney is not a fraud. He is a war head and goes where there is support for his agenda to push for war.
Harris is the biggest phony and liar in the political scene. If not a liar then she is really struggling to push the puppet masters message who appointed her to be the candidate without a single vote.
Now for something completely different, Scumbag Zelensky is threating to become a Nuclear nation if not let into NATO. Who couldn't predict that Ukraine would eventually become an enemy. Imagine going to an interview to present your case to join an alliance and that is what you respond with. I'd say F off and no more money or backing from the US. I've already said that. Of course the current US regime ponies up 425 mil more in money and weapons.
‘Either Nukes or Alliance’ – Zelensky Raises Specter of Ukraine Becoming Nuclear Again
The Ukrainian president said he told Republican candidate Donald Trump that Ukraine’s solution is either restoring its status as a nuclear state or becoming a NATO member, but Kyiv chose the latter.www.kyivpost.com
I'm all for him getting nukes and developing their own defense industry. Get us out of it. Putin will have a change of heart if he knows there's a good chance his dacha will be vaporized if he continues his land grab.
Similar threads
