Political poster

[Matt Deckard]

Politics is not at home on Indy Gear...
What do you guys think of this poster?

 

[MK]

I am not sure of the connotation.

"So called crusade"? Is this like those who say the moon mission never really happened. That it was all staged?

 

[Renderking Fisk]

I have to agree with MK. While the leftists say we've done too much, I say we haven't done enough.

If you're going to have our Armed Services in Iraq... let them loose to get the job done. If not, bring them home.

 

[Matt Deckard]

I wonder what would happen to the world if we pulled out all together. Just brought all our troops home globally.

Many think it would be a good idea, though I think it would have disasterous effects.

 

[MK]

The isolationist have always been wrong. I am not saying we have always made the right moves......but no moves at all equals defeat.

 

[The_Edge]

 

[Andykev]

Hummmm....the Democrats seem to always be catching or taking from us..the ulitmate receivers!!

Hummm. ...the Republicans seem to know where to throw the next pitch.....


You decide!

 

[farnham54]

Well, the photoshopping is reasonably good, but that's about it

I agree with MK on this one. Unfortunatley, Washington (more Dems the Reps) have a habit of throwing the leash on things--Take Patton immediatley after WWII: He wanted to fuel up and take out Russia while he was there. Now, not saying that was nessecarily the best idea, but it would have saved about 60 years of nuclear threats and white knucles.

Or Vietnam; our boys really only started kicking ass in proper fashion when they were allowed to go into Cambodia. Again, Washington wouldn't take the gloves off for the longest time (with the lack of the "State of Emergency" declaration, some would say they refused to take the gloves off at all), resulting in far more casualties then necessary.

Or Gulf War One: Norman could have had Saddam's heart on a plate, if he was let.

But no, the best dogs that get results always stay on the chain . Time will tell on this one, Gents.

Regards,

Craig

 

[Renderking Fisk]

Originally posted by farnham54


Or Gulf War One: Norman could have had Saddam's heart on a plate, if he was let.

Word is that if George Sr. went after Sadam... he would have faced big opposition in Congress and the UN. They were afraid that an Iraq with out Saddam would cause chaos in the middle East. No matter what you say about this thugg, he did know how to keep all the regimes in check.

Is the world better now that he's gone? Maybe... but lets make Faluga a parking lot just to be sure.

 

[farnham54]

"Word is that if George Sr. went after Sadam... he would have faced big opposition in Congress and the UN. They were afraid that an Iraq with out Saddam would cause chaos in the middle East. No matter what you say about this thugg, he did know how to keep all the regimes in check."

I agree, Ren, but how is that much different then the current situation? Congress, well they were on side this time around but probobly could have been swayed (just as they were this time) given enough time; but the UN was against Georgie Junior right through (still is, I believe). And as per stability, things have gotten worse for the region now. Gulf War One was only a few short years after the end of the Cold War. Russian arms and ammunition were obviously plentiful, but that is even more so now. The resistance fighters have more for less, which means more young Americans dead. That coupled with cheaper communications technology making it easier for things to work...In my mind, it would have been MUCH better to go get him the first time around (though, of course, I can completely see why they didn't, and after all, Hindsight is 20/20.)

One last point; that's not even factoring in the money aspect. Getting him while they still had their troops over there would save billions in transportation and mobilization.

Regards,

Craig