Obama says Vietnam was a misunderstanding, >>mod edit<<

This is actually closer to the truth. Besides, Johnson orchestrated the Vietnam war through the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

 

I rest my case.

 

?

This is really the only political forum i frequent, as forum hopping to others constantly would be an even bigger time waste. As you might be able to tell, there are almost no Muslims on this forum, and the ones that are on this forum are moderates. There are however a lot of Christians. Conservative ones who don't align with me politically to boot. Thus I argue with them. If there was some pro Taliban Muslim on this forum blabbing about destroying America and how the West is evil and other tripe, I would be right there with everyone else in telling them to (*)(*)(*)(*) off, and that their country is probably (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up because they let Imams run it.

 

Proof of your lack of logic is that you switch the topic to whether Travis was fighting for freedom rather than stick to the point about whether MacArthur should have been a suicidal moron like Travis. The Texas idiot almost lost the war by caring more about fighting than winning, which is what you would have had MacArthur do. He couldn't evacuate all those troops, so he was forced to let them fight a guerrilla war, which I don't think they did, so whose fault was it?

 

You shouldn't pay any attention at all to the opinions of appeasers. "It has become fashionable" --would you say having nose piercings is "fashionable"? No, it's only a fad of freaks we should ignore. So by giving the appeasers the time of day, you are endorsing their right to be so loud in the media.

Real Americans are not afraid of Nazislami retaliation. We have yet to fight the real war. Whatever a gutless puke draftdodger like Bush did to what he called "the religion of peace" was about as valid as his "service" during the Vietnam War. The reason Al Caida didn't attack America again is that real Americans would have had enough of these rhinestone cowboys and forced the government to do everything I propose: deport all Muslims, seize OPEC oil, nuke Mecca and the Iranian missile sites, seize all Muslim financial assets, and destroy the Pakistani missiles. In WWII, patriots turned Germany and Japan into ashtrays.

Speaking of Texxon Bush's treason, it carries over most revealingly to the fact that he is a boytoy of the oil companies, who have been collaborating with jihadist OPEC from the beginning because our oil-slimed ruling class piggybacks off the Nazislami price-gouging. The traitors who have made themselves fashionable are the sissies who oppose decapitation, a wonderful concept I heard for the first time on the unlikely source of PF. Of course, a lot of drooling idiots take political celebrities seriously and think that following their yellow brick road is fashionable.

 

With no help from the US at all. In fact, the US (along with Thailand) gave aid to the Khmer Rouge.

 

Ho Chi Minh "letter"

 

I didn't say he should have stayed. Sure it would have been noble to stay. But that would have been the wrong decision, and I know that.

The issue is the way he left. He told his men multiple times a real soldier is ready to fight to the end, then he left them one day without warning. Leaving them in complete disarray and completely sapping what moral was left. Then when he came back he was like "Ha, sorry it took me so long to get back guys, but at least I showed up right! Hey, look at this shiny Medal of Honor they gave me! Sorry, you guys don't get one."

You don't just show up like that and try to act chill in front of an army you left for dead, and the quarter that survived was brutalized, cannibalized, tortured, and starved.

 

And China invaded them over it, and Vietnam managed to throw them out beating every single odd.

- - - Updated - - -

Would you have been one of the people supporting the Japanese internment camps during WW2?

 

Yes. If you want to win, you don't take chances.

 

Prosecuting any wars without wartime tax rates is taking a chance.

 

Would you have also supported German internment?

 

I know what happened, NV engaged in a full invasion and conquered SVN.

But I guess you find no morality in the losing of a few hundred thousand trying to stop the death of millions and the enslavement of even more. And you seem to forget that Congress refused to fund Nixon's support of SVN which was part of his peace plan.

- - - Updated - - -

Trading one party of death for another.

 

The results of the US having lost the war against Vietnam do not support your claims.

 

Compared to the Khmer Rouge, the Vietnamese were cub scouts.

 

Never read the ILA or AUTUMF?

Here from our former SecState and leading candidate for the Democrat Presidential nomination.

"There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm, and I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade.

For now nearly 20 years, the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered, is because of Saddam's leadership.

The very difficult question for all of us, is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven track record of a commitment, if not an obsession, with weapons of mass destruction.

I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision, and it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution. That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein, and a willingness on his part to disarm, and to account for his chemical and biological storehouses.

With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for United States leadership. And I am talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo, where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States, and we had to do it alone. It would have been far preferable if the Russians and others had agreed to do it through the United Nations -- they would not. I'm happy that, in the face of such horrible suffering, we did act."
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b83_1200118934#1VVuwkdj7dL5ACMY.99

Here are some more reasons.
http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

Oh he did, that inspectors had cataloged what he had, that is what they were looking for and we found plenty of proscribed materials a resources.

And some are entirely ignorant of it, they were there to account for the stockpiles they were in process of destroying when the first round was ended and they had to leave the country. And YES that is a reason we went to war because we knew he would never give up his desire to not only possess WMD but his willingness to use them, it was more critical than the small stockpiles we knew he not been destroyed previously. And of course the inspections were a joke and would never be able to control him. Besides the fact that he was bribing the UN and several countries into getting the sanctions lifted. What then?

Usable WMD. Again you seem ignorant of what we did find like his stockpiles of highly concentrated organophosphates, proscribed and undeclared, deadly in their own right and the precusor to even more toxic nerve gases. Hidden in underground camoflaged bunkers along side new chemcial weapons shells. Yes the "junk" we found were WMD that he had tried to hide.

"The Iraq Survey Group determined that Iraq had abandoned its quest to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and that it had already destroyed all of its existing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons"

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/no-wmds-in-iraq/

Scientific Research and Intention to Reconstitute WMD
Many former Iraqi officials close to Saddam either heard him say or inferred that he intended to resume WMD programs when sanctions were lifted. Those around him at the time do not believe that hemade a decision to permanently abandon WMD programs.Saddam encouraged Iraqi officials to preserve the nation’s scientific brain trust essential for WMD. Saddam told his advisors as early as 1991 that he wanted to keep Iraq’s nuclear scientists fully employed. This theme of preserving personnel resources persisted throughout the sanctions period.

Saddam’s primary concern was retaining a cadre of skilled scientists to facilitate reconstitution of WMD programs after sanctions were lifted, according to former science advisor Ja’far Diya’ Ja’far Hashim. Saddam communicated his policy in several meetings with officials from MIC, Ministry of Industry and Minerals, and the IAEC in 1991-1992. Saddam instructed general directors of Iraqi state companies and other state entities to prevent key scientists from the pre-1991 WMD program from leaving the country. This retention of scientists was Iraq’s only step taken to prepare for a resumption of WMD, in Ja’far’s opinion.
Presidential secretary ‘Abd Hamid Mahmud wrote that in 1991 Saddam told the scientists that they should “preserve plans in their minds” and “keep the brains of Iraq’s scientists fresh.” Iraq was to destroy everything apart from knowledge, which would be used to reconstitute a WMD program.
Saddam wanted people to keep knowledge in their heads rather than retain documents that could have been exposed, according to former Deputy Prime Minister Tariq ‘Aziz. Nuclear scientists were told in general terms that the program was over after 1991, and Tariq ‘Aziz inferred that the scientists understood that they should not keep documents or equipment. ‘Aziz also noted that if Saddam had the same opportunity as he did in the 1980s, he probably would have resumed research on nuclear weapons.
Ja’far said that Saddam stated on several occasions that he did not consider ballistic missiles to be WMD and therefore Iraq should not be subject to missile restrictions. Ja’far was unaware of any WMD activities in Iraq after the Gulf war, but said he thought Saddam would reconstitute all WMD disciplines when sanctions were lifted, although he cautioned that he never heard Saddam say this explicitly. Several former senior Regime officials also contended that nuclear weapons would have been important—if not central—components of Saddam’s future WMD force.
According to two senior Iraqi scientists, in 1993 Husayn Kamil, then the Minister of Military Industrialization, announced in a speech to a large audience of WMD scientists at the Space Research Center in Baghdad that WMD programs would resume and be expanded, when UNSCOM inspectors left Iraq. Husayn Kamil’s intimate relationship with Saddam added particular credibility to his remarks.

The Surface-to-Surface Missile Command concealed undeclared Al Husayn and Scud missiles, launchers, and chemical and biological warheads.
Particularly in the early 1990s, the SRG concealed uranium enrichment equipment, missiles, missile manufacturing equipment, “know-how” documents from all the programs, as well as a supply of strategic materials.
The RG Security Directorate of the SSO conveyed instruction from Husayn Kamil and Qusay to the SRG elements that were hiding material and documents, and SSO political officers at SRG units often knew the whereabouts of the hidden material.
Senior Regime members failed to anticipate the duration of sanctions and the rigor of UN inspections.

Saddam initially expected the sanctions would last no more than three years, and many Iraqis doubted the sanctions would be so comprehensive, according to several detainee interviews. These perceptions probably persuaded senior Regime leaders that they could weather a short-lived sanctions regime by making limited concessions, hiding much of their pre-existing weapons and documentation, and even expanding biological warfare potential by enhancing dual-use facilities.
Following unexpectedly thorough inspections, Saddam ordered Husayn Kamil in July 1991 to destroy unilaterally large numbers of undeclared weapons and related materials to conceal Iraq’s WMD capabilities. This destruction–and Iraq’s failure to document the destruction–greatly complicated UN verification efforts and thereby prolonged UN economic sanctions on Iraq. According to Iraqi Presidential Advisor ‘Amir Hamudi Hasan Al Sa’adi, the unilateral destruction decision was comparable in its negative consequences for Iraq with the decision to invade Kuwait.
Intrusive inspections also affected potential WMD programs by guaranteeing the presence of inspection teams in Iraqi military, and research and development facilities.
Sanctions imposed constraints on potential WMD programs through limitations on resources and restraints on imports. The sanctions forced Iraq to slash funding that might have been used to refurbish the military establishment and complicated the import of military goods. Rebuilding the military, including any WMD capability, required an end to sanctions.
The economic bite of the sanctions instead grew increasingly painful and forced the Regime to adopt an unprecedented range of austerity measures by 1996. Disclosure of new evidence of Iraqi WMD activity following Husayn Kamil’s 1995 flight to Jordan undermined Baghdad’s case before the UN.

Looking Ahead to Resume WMD Programs
The Regime made a token effort to comply with the disarmament process, but the Iraqis never intended to meet the spirit of the UNSC’s resolutions. Outward acts of compliance belied a covert desire to resume WMD activities. Several senior officials also either inferred or heard Saddam say that he reserved the right to resume WMD research after sanctions.

Presidential secretary ‘Abd Hamid Mahmud, while a detainee, wrote: “If the sanctions would have been lifted and there is no UN monitoring, then it was possible for Saddam to continue his WMD activities and in my estimation it would have been done in a total secrecy and [with] concealment because he gained from 1991 and UN decisions.” But in another debrief, Huwaysh said it would take 6 months to reconstitute a mustard program.

Saddam had said that after sanctions Iraq would resume production of WMD to “achieve international balance and protect the dignity of Iraq and Iraqis and the Arab nations,” according to former presidential secretary ‘Abd. ‘Abd wrote while a detainee, “He [Saddam] would say if only Iraq possessed the nuclear weapon then no one would commit acts of aggression on it or any other Arab country, and the Palestinian issue would be solved peacefully because of Iraq.”
Saddam would have restarted WMD programs, beginning with the nuclear program, after sanctions, according to Tariq ‘Aziz. Saddam never formally stated this intention, according to ‘Aziz, but he did not believe other countries in the region should be able to have WMD when Iraq could not. ‘Aziz assessed that Iraq could have a WMD capability within two years of the end of sanctions.
Saddam’s intent to maintain and compartment WMD capabilities was well known and often acknowledged by high level authorities, according to a senior Al Kindi State Company official. The Minister of Military Industrialization allegedly told the source that Saddam wanted a WMD program “on the shelf.” Huwaysh, in a written statement, explained instead that Saddam briefed senior officials on several occasions saying, “We do not intend or aspire to return to our previous programs to produce WMD, if the Security Council abides by its obligations pertaining to these resolutions [UNSCR 687, paragraph 14].” Saddam reiterated this point in a cabinet meeting in 2002, according to Dr. Humam ‘Abd-al-Khaliq ‘Abd-al Ghafur, the former Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research.
Huwaysh believed that Saddam would base his decision regarding future Iraqi WMD development on how the Security Council followed through on its promise in paragraph 14 to establish “in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery.” If this promise was not fulfilled, Iraq should be free to act in its own interests. During an earlier debrief Huwaysh speculated that Iraq would have reconstituted many of its proscribed programs within five years if OIF had not occurred.
During a custodial interview, Saddam, when asked whether he would reconstitute WMD programs after sanctions were lifted, implied that Iraq would have done what was necessary.

Do I need to continue?

It was your statement, failed to get the around it.

Yes they had not actually collaborated on any specific acts against western nations but Saddam's secret police were and had been in contact with terrorist groups giving them aid and support and Saddam had full intentions of exploiting those contacts.
http://usiraq.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000863

Damn sorry you don't get them straight but using the Washington Post and their out of context reporting will do that to you.

 

How are our wars on multiple fronts, going?

Even some of the senior staff of even a charismatic, Hilter, started to rebel after only the second front was opened without having accomplished the goals set for the first front.

 

No. They actually didn't. Its estimated the Vietnamese ended up killing between 30,000 and 100,000 civilians during their invasion and occupation. A far cry from the 3,000,000 that had died under Po. about half a million also died from famine during those years, but that was Po Pots fault too, as his idiotic planning led to those crop shortages and famines.

 

and thats exactly what we have to look forward to if we allow progressive communists to plan our lives for us....

 

War is war.

Also, there are plenty of non communist progressives. TR being a good example. Communism is an impossible ideology. While it does look good on paper, human greed makes it impossible in reality. Progressiveness is the other way around, as reality has a progressive bias. No matter what, no matter how bad things get, somewhere, somehow, humans are advancing forward technologically, socially, etc... Human history has been one big trial of progress.

 

Communists are "progressives" now? Holy crap. Next, we'll learn that the Taliban is liberal, and Al Qaeda is benign.

Somehow, the word "oxymoron" comes to mind.

 

Anyone who compares nose piercings to Christian bashing has problems IMO.

You wish to talk about a former POTUS and his service? Obama served where and when? How about Slick? Here's his stellar record in the military....

www.1stcavmedic.com/bill-clinton-draft.htm

And here's an audio of Slick saying why he didn't take Osama from Sudan...

http://youtu.be/Wvo2lQe81xk

And last but not least, what Slick knew and when he knew it................and did nothing about it......

www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3c1235b85b5c.htm

No charge for the education.

- - - Updated - - -

Non-responsive. But thanks for playing anyway.

 

About 600,000 in the civil war itself. But I'm sure both countries are far better off under the totalitarian communist regimes than had we successfully defended SV from the invasion from the north.

 

There was no defending SV from the north. We had pissed so many people in the south off so much, and had neutered and corrupted the government so much there was no way to win and leave knowing the north would return and win without us being there to stop them.

 

Yes there was and that is what it was, an invasion of one sovereign nation by another.