.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to ShadowSD.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ShadowSD:1011493"]Nobody remembered to mention the bigger news... We are beginning withdrawal from Afghanistan in eighteen months, and explicitly committing not to occupy their country (or any country ever - in the speech last night, Obama actually went that far, I never thought I'd hear a US President say that). It's the difference between tactics and strategy. Going into Iraq was bad [B]strategy[/B] because it was a lie and pointless. Not having enough troops was a bad [B]tactic[/B] Bush purposefully used to set up an indefinite stalemate and build what he intended to be permanent bases to occupy the country and it's oil fields. Putting in more troops was a good [B]tactic[/B] attempted when the whole thing really started to implode, but it still failed to justify the bad [B]strategy[/B]. Obama's strategy seems to be the opposite of Bush, and if he's using a good tactic to achieve a good strategy - a good strategy being getting the fuck out of occupying other countries - it's a good thing. Just my two cents. After all, if Bush was elected, or McCain, we'd be in both countries FOREVER, probably even if Hillary had been elected. We might even be starting shit with Iran right now. The MIC is out of fucking control, and I'm more worried that Obama won't have time to gut it sufficiently in time for the next guy in seven years not to just pick up where Bush left off.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.004 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][