leave
And then go back in in a couple years?
Not me.
Drill baby, drill!
This is a choice between the lessor of the evils and no matter what, Mr. Ranger isn’t going to like it.
No…
It’s a ■■■■ sandwich, no doubt.
But a choice has to be made, doesn’t it? Unless you want to meander on as in Afghanistan.
So what should the response be if there’s another large-scale attack ala 9/11?
Not exactly a far fetched idea given the resources they now have available to them, mind.
Absolutely. They can pay us for our protection in oil or they can do it their damn selves. Freedom is messy.
Amazing how today’s Republicans throw W and company under the bus, when during that time, they supported the Iraq war, defended the WMD claim, and supported Dick’s former company as well.
Libertarians and Liberals, not so much.
Precursor to what they will be saying about Trump in a few years.
Ok.
They refuse to pay up the protection money, and the Govt of Iraq completely collapses.
Now you get attacked by a resurgent ISIS. What next?
Who’s “you” in this hypothetical?
The Great Satan, obvs.
Oh. Well, you don’t know that.
True.
You think the gamble is worth it then? Leave and see what happens?
Are you suggesting using a nuclear weapon? I’d rather leave and then go back once in a while and use them for target practice when training our new pilots.
No, I somehow doubt dropping a nuclear weapon on a civilian population will calm down the middle-east.
1 Like
Who said we should go in there and stay?
No. Give Iraq the ultimatum of making it worth our time first. They will buckle, like Arab nations do.
So just shake them down for money.
How much would be worth it, and for how much assistance? Boots on the ground?
If you remember the old forum, I took heat over it but stood my ground…“we” shouldn’t be and never should have been there…period.
