“He was asked about President Bush’s comment that we could stay in Iraq for 50 years. McCain replied, “Make it 100. We’ve been in South Korea . . . we’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, that’s fine with me.”
Where’s the song about our presence in Germany? Japan? South Korea? I assume Obama is going to pull everyone home? And just out of curiosity, what do you think will happen should we pull everyone out of Iraq tomorrow? Clearly Iran will start to be nice to us and stop the low level killing of Americans or the sponsorship there of that they have been engaged in for the last 30 years. Not to terribly interested in fairness in representing what McCain actually said, are you. Of all the valid reasons to be concerned about McCain you decided to go with this. While it would be nice to go back in time knowing what we know now and didn’t then, and not invade, you do understand that isnt an option, right? I pretty much expect that shallow kind of thinking from the entertainers, but why are you sliding down that path?
Yes, what would be do if we pulled everyone out of Iraq? Maybe we could stop funneling our money into the war budget for a start. I’ve forgotten what the point of this war was — first it was “Operation Get Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Then as soon as the ground war started it magically became “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” I believed the propaganda party line with regard to the former, but the latter is a poor excuse for justifying our current state of foreign affairs. As I’m “sliding down that path” this November, I won’t be pulling the lever for McCain, but I won’t be pulling for Obama either — going to throw my vote away for the first time on whoever the third party candidate is.
Yes, John McCain is the reason that war exists. What an immature and a-historical view of the world. Forget all about the existence of totalitarian ideologies and authoritarian regimes that are antithetical and indeed hostile to liberal democracy.
I am supportive of most libertarian critiques of government and believe this site provides a valuable service; however, I also believe libertarians would be taken much more seriously if some of their representatives weren’t so naive about foreign policy.
I thought the deal with libertarians was to “mind your own business”! Where did those posts come from? We are now fighting a war between Sunnis, Shiites, and whomever else might get involved. But, by the way it looks now, it has turned into a religious war. And, we all know how they can be won! By killing the opposition?!Not a good idea, as far as I am concerned. If we would leave these people alone, they would settle it among themselves. But, there might be a bunch more “terrorists” that think The US is involved in, too many, of the affairs of other nations! (The only thing a terrorist, and I have in common!) What would happen if we brought our soldiers home and fortified our borders. Probably, we will never know because the US population continues to support politics, as usual! In complete ignorance 85% of the time.
And, why is it, Christians don’t want to kill all of the other religions out, like these people (Muslims) who fight among their own? Sounds sort of like Northern Ireland was, years ago! Oops! Those were Christians, were they not?
Michael, the war in N. Ireland was a religious war? Here I always thought it had something to do with irish independence.
J.D., thanks to the pullout in vietnam the cold war was extended by decades guaranteeing millions more deaths and tens of millions of people enslaved by their own governments. Pulling out of vietnam, lebanon, and somalia is the primary cause of the 9/11 attacks. Bin laden was trained by the U.S. in one regard, we trained him to believe we’d punk out when punched in the mouth.
is it a fair question to ask what DID happen when we cravenly cut & ran from southeast asia in 1973/4? is it fair to point out that – although LBJ was as usual wrong, and ww3 didn’t start – that when we left the bad guys we’d been fighting immediately proceeded to:
*butcher their enemies
*imprison those they didn’t butcher
*turn reasonably healthy economies into ‘north korea lite’ for 20 years or so
*issue laws allowing them to control every aspect of their subjects’ lives
*in the case of cambodia, initiate genocide. bravely murdering women and children in an orderly, systematic fashion
*start another war quick like a bunny
were those good things for america? were they good things for the people of SE asia? is it not likely that’s pretty much precisely what’ll happen upon our exit from iraq? if not, why not?
For a long time I have hated LBJ for all the young lives he cavalierly pissed away in Viet Nam.
So, you could call me anti-war. I believe there are times when it’s necessary, but with the arguable exception of Afghanistan, there haven’t been any such times while I’ve been alive.
But, the feelings expressed above are moderate compared to how I feel about Bush. While LBJ is responsible for many more deaths, at least one can get the sense that LBJ might have been motivated by something other than self-possessed arrogance and a sociopathic inability to value anyone’s life but his own.
It’s exceedingly difficult for me to imagine any one of the candidates being as utterly cold and wasteful of human life as Bush, but I would rather McCain never have the opportunity to prove me wrong.
yeah. He was motivated by the Gulf of Tonkin. Which must have been true, right? But I agree: McCain would make Bush look like a competent, peaceful conservative. Hell, McCain is just beggin for a war with Iran. Would not be suprised if Bush served it to him on a silver platter by starting it before he left office. Next week even…
Tokin, are you suggesting that the cold war would have ended with Vietnam? Hahaha. Seriously? Oh, that’s just maddening.
And Nom de Guerre: i think you have made some valid points, but I think you come from a different standpoint than I do: of all the points you made, the United States did the very same thing. Except when we did it, we drained the wealth out of this country, killed our own soldiers, and emboldened communist factions worldwide: it wasn’t that we pulled out that motivated them, it was that we were looked upon as an imperialist nation trying to dominate low-key people into submission. Our intentions were pure, sure, but, the consequence was impressively detrimental overall.
To answer your question of whether it was good for the United States, I submit that it was not. Moving forward to present day Iraq, what interests do we have there? The very reason why we are there is ultimately unknown to anyone at this point. The explanations have been shifted, changed, and photoshopped many times over to the point that we just accept that we are there.
And we are there. And McCain and Hillary willing, we’ll stay there: serving interests unknown to us and those not related to us, ‘protecting’ us from ‘monsters’ they have created in our heads, and circularly legitimizing thier necessity as government officers by creating the very problem they want to resolve.
In this sense, perhaps we agree: at least in Vietnam we had a real, tangible enemey to combat. Iraq? just the opposite….
Yeah, I’m pretty skeptical about how the Vietnam war escalated, too. All wars seem to have that trigger that is always later found to be questionable (even WW2 if you’ve read “day of Deceit”).
Believe me, I’m no friend to LBJ. I think science would be making a major contribution to mankind if they could bring him back to life so he could stand trial for murder. But, I think LBJ may have actually regretted it later on.
I don’t think Bush suffers even the slightest twinge of guilt about the American lives lost “liberating Iraq” (as if that’s a legitimate reason to be there to begin with). Nor do his handlers.