Land of Free

[Anonymous]

Allan, just a little late night humor to loosen up your bow ties a bit. Carry on.

[NotCranky]

Yeah, Don’t mean to hurt your feelings, sorry if I did.

Are you saying since the U.S. least vulnerable and most powerful this is the cause for an imperative to influence world affairs?

“I also believe that if a Democrat is elected in ’08, we won’t waste any time in trying to get out and as fast as possible.”

You could be right. I watched the debates on you tube,it does sound like they are indicating intentions to do what you are saying. I am not sure I expect them to follow through. I will expect a realignment.

You said that if this happened it gives you concerns of a loss of U.S. prestige. What do you mean by that and what does it matter to you? Do you thing it gives an opening for the balance of power to shift from the “bad” to the “worse”?

We have a afternoon party at home today. I will be busy with that.

Thanks

[NotCranky]

Yeah, Don’t mean to hurt your feelings, sorry if I did.

Are you saying since the U.S. least vulnerable and most powerful this is the cause for an imperative to influence world affairs?

“I also believe that if a Democrat is elected in ’08, we won’t waste any time in trying to get out and as fast as possible.”

You could be right. I watched the debates on you tube,it does sound like they are indicating intentions to do what you are saying. I am not sure I expect them to follow through. I will expect a realignment.

You said that if this happened it gives you concerns of a loss of U.S. prestige. What do you mean by that and what does it matter to you? Do you thing it gives an opening for the balance of power to shift from the “bad” to the “worse”?

We have a afternoon party at home today. I will be busy with that.

Thanks

[NotCranky]

Yeah, Don’t mean to hurt your feelings, sorry if I did.

Are you saying since the U.S. least vulnerable and most powerful this is the cause for an imperative to influence world affairs?

“I also believe that if a Democrat is elected in ’08, we won’t waste any time in trying to get out and as fast as possible.”

You could be right. I watched the debates on you tube,it does sound like they are indicating intentions to do what you are saying. I am not sure I expect them to follow through. I will expect a realignment.

You said that if this happened it gives you concerns of a loss of U.S. prestige. What do you mean by that and what does it matter to you? Do you thing it gives an opening for the balance of power to shift from the “bad” to the “worse”?

We have a afternoon party at home today. I will be busy with that.

Thanks

[NotCranky]

Yeah, Don’t mean to hurt your feelings, sorry if I did.

Are you saying since the U.S. least vulnerable and most powerful this is the cause for an imperative to influence world affairs?

“I also believe that if a Democrat is elected in ’08, we won’t waste any time in trying to get out and as fast as possible.”

You could be right. I watched the debates on you tube,it does sound like they are indicating intentions to do what you are saying. I am not sure I expect them to follow through. I will expect a realignment.

You said that if this happened it gives you concerns of a loss of U.S. prestige. What do you mean by that and what does it matter to you? Do you thing it gives an opening for the balance of power to shift from the “bad” to the “worse”?

We have a afternoon party at home today. I will be busy with that.

Thanks

[NotCranky]

Yeah, Don’t mean to hurt your feelings, sorry if I did.

Are you saying since the U.S. least vulnerable and most powerful this is the cause for an imperative to influence world affairs?

“I also believe that if a Democrat is elected in ’08, we won’t waste any time in trying to get out and as fast as possible.”

You could be right. I watched the debates on you tube,it does sound like they are indicating intentions to do what you are saying. I am not sure I expect them to follow through. I will expect a realignment.

You said that if this happened it gives you concerns of a loss of U.S. prestige. What do you mean by that and what does it matter to you? Do you thing it gives an opening for the balance of power to shift from the “bad” to the “worse”?

We have a afternoon party at home today. I will be busy with that.

Thanks

[Allan from Fallbrook]

marion: Would it surprise you to know that I don’t own a single bow tie? Not one.

Carrying on.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

marion: Would it surprise you to know that I don’t own a single bow tie? Not one.

Carrying on.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

marion: Would it surprise you to know that I don’t own a single bow tie? Not one.

Carrying on.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

marion: Would it surprise you to know that I don’t own a single bow tie? Not one.

Carrying on.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

marion: Would it surprise you to know that I don’t own a single bow tie? Not one.

Carrying on.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rus: No hurt feelings. And, no, I’m not arguing that the US has some moral imperative to influence world affairs. The problem is this: When the US has withdrawn from the world stage, like in the 1930s, it creates a vacuum and the potential for bad things to happen, such as the rise of fascism in Europe, and Japanese militarism in the Pacific.

The period of the late 1970s is another excellent example. The Soviets enjoyed tremendous sway in world affairs, and the US had pulled back as a result of Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran hostage crisis, etc. When Reagan came to power, he immediately set about reversing that course, and to great effect. In my mind, it is inarguable that this was a good thing, and it culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces. Were some of the methods used questionable? Absolutely.

A weak US provided the opportunity for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us in 2001. This perceived weakness was derived from our unwillingness to strike back after the embassy bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers in Saudi, the Cole incident and our abrupt departure from Somalia.

What do you think would happen if we effected a similarly abrupt exit from Iraq?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rus: No hurt feelings. And, no, I’m not arguing that the US has some moral imperative to influence world affairs. The problem is this: When the US has withdrawn from the world stage, like in the 1930s, it creates a vacuum and the potential for bad things to happen, such as the rise of fascism in Europe, and Japanese militarism in the Pacific.

The period of the late 1970s is another excellent example. The Soviets enjoyed tremendous sway in world affairs, and the US had pulled back as a result of Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran hostage crisis, etc. When Reagan came to power, he immediately set about reversing that course, and to great effect. In my mind, it is inarguable that this was a good thing, and it culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces. Were some of the methods used questionable? Absolutely.

A weak US provided the opportunity for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us in 2001. This perceived weakness was derived from our unwillingness to strike back after the embassy bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers in Saudi, the Cole incident and our abrupt departure from Somalia.

What do you think would happen if we effected a similarly abrupt exit from Iraq?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rus: No hurt feelings. And, no, I’m not arguing that the US has some moral imperative to influence world affairs. The problem is this: When the US has withdrawn from the world stage, like in the 1930s, it creates a vacuum and the potential for bad things to happen, such as the rise of fascism in Europe, and Japanese militarism in the Pacific.

The period of the late 1970s is another excellent example. The Soviets enjoyed tremendous sway in world affairs, and the US had pulled back as a result of Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran hostage crisis, etc. When Reagan came to power, he immediately set about reversing that course, and to great effect. In my mind, it is inarguable that this was a good thing, and it culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces. Were some of the methods used questionable? Absolutely.

A weak US provided the opportunity for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us in 2001. This perceived weakness was derived from our unwillingness to strike back after the embassy bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers in Saudi, the Cole incident and our abrupt departure from Somalia.

What do you think would happen if we effected a similarly abrupt exit from Iraq?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rus: No hurt feelings. And, no, I’m not arguing that the US has some moral imperative to influence world affairs. The problem is this: When the US has withdrawn from the world stage, like in the 1930s, it creates a vacuum and the potential for bad things to happen, such as the rise of fascism in Europe, and Japanese militarism in the Pacific.

The period of the late 1970s is another excellent example. The Soviets enjoyed tremendous sway in world affairs, and the US had pulled back as a result of Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran hostage crisis, etc. When Reagan came to power, he immediately set about reversing that course, and to great effect. In my mind, it is inarguable that this was a good thing, and it culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces. Were some of the methods used questionable? Absolutely.

A weak US provided the opportunity for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us in 2001. This perceived weakness was derived from our unwillingness to strike back after the embassy bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers in Saudi, the Cole incident and our abrupt departure from Somalia.

What do you think would happen if we effected a similarly abrupt exit from Iraq?

[Author]

Posts