He was the "founder" of Progressive-ism. What's in a label?
The Conservative Principle
- Thread starter Buy1Sell2
- Start date
He was the "founder" of Progressive-ism. What's in a label?
The real mess was pulling out when we had won. (Obama). I can see a case for not going in in the first place but Saddam had WMDs and I believe they were moved. Once we go in to a country we have to stay there. Or we just shouldn't go.
Correct. The first RINO. Also Herbert Hoover was a Republican and is not far above the bottom 5.
I don't know about "staying there", but I do believe that we need a REALLY good reason to conduct warring actions in another country... like, "we go in to pound them into submission to stop what they are doing" (regime change just because we don't agree with another country's leadership is NOT good enough reason).... or if we don't have that kind of conviction, we don't go in at all. This "17 years of warring in Afghanistan" is BS beyond all good reason.
Last edited:
I can't agree at this time. We are keeping the Taliban and terrorism in check. I believe the base in Afghanistan should remain permanent as it is on the other side of Iran and we need a presence there.
Let me ask... what's so damned important to America about Afghanistan? Oil? Opium trade?
Would there even be a Taliban of concern to us had Odumbo not enabled them?
(Personally... I'm concerned all of this warring and immigration consequence is really just a gigantic false flag... the methodology the globalists are using to try to destroy America in such a way we don't understand what/how they are "doing it to us".)
Last edited:
GW Bush was a RINO liberal. There was nothing conservative about him! He spent like a drunk sailor. Got into wars without an exit strategy. The biggest mistake is the so called nation building. We spent trillions on that BS strategy not counting the hundreds of thousands injured and the thousands killed in our troops! If the US left the Iraqi army intact, we could have arrested Saddam Hussein, did not fracture and destroy Iraq and would not have given rise to IS and Al Queda groups. Also, less US troops would have been killed and wounded. We should have given Afghanistan our attention and gone after Bin Laden full bore. Then, left Afghanistan right after! Again US troops lives saved and less wounded too! The amount of US tax dollars could have been better spent in the US!
The importance of Afghanistan is to keep the Taliban and terrorism in check. In addition, the geographic area is strategic for us to continue our presence there just as we have in Europe.Let me ask... what's so damned important to America about Afghanistan? Oil? Opium trade?
Would there even be a Taliban of concern to us had Odumbo not enabled them?
(Personally... I'm concerned all of this warring and immigration consequence is really just a gigantic false flag... the methodology the globalists are using to try to destroy America in such a way we don't understand what/how they are "doing it to us".)
"Continue our presence"? Do we have military bases there??
Russia abandoned Afghanistan after 10 years of occupation... "too much trouble, not worth it".
Same for us? Or is it actually, "some politco made a major F'up getting us into there and we can't find a face-saving way out"... so, we're still there? Russia said, "screw this place"... tucked tail and pulled out. Why can't we also abandon a lost cause?
Last edited:
To this point what we have done in Afghanistan has been a ringing success. I don't think using " Russia couldn't do it so we can't" is a good position to take in this discussion. I look for us to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely as well we should.