We need to leave both those countries immediately. Is there any wonder that our soldiers are flipping out and killing people? Most of them have been deployed 3-4 times. Watching your buddies get blown up by bombs hidden in anything the enemy can fin find, has to be hell on our troops.

@ Rocky, the best way to avoid a war is to not start one. All of the military might and the projection of power didn’t do a thing to scare al Qaeda.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Source: Edmund Burke.

“Enjoy your holiday!” Source: Rocky Humbert (whose birthday falls on Armistice Day.)

It is clear from my post that I oppose most wars most times. Certainly every war since WW2, including Kuwait, which I do not believe was about our national survival either. (And I have no doubt this country would have survived if North Korea took over South Korea so I’d not have helped them either.)

You guys do not seem to understand what I am saying. I suspect you haven’t seen a war we’ve been in since WW2 you didn’t support, except possibly Viet Nam and maybe that’s not what your position was in ‘68 but 20-20 hindsight.

Because how the heck did we get into it to begin with if everyone who now says it was a mistake said that in ‘68? I’m proud to have been in the anti-war movement then. I’m still in it. Only the countries involved are different.

And when both Iraq and Afghanistan collapse after the U.S. leaves, maybe 25 years from now history will say we screwed those two up too.
That like Nam, we had the best intentions but went straight to hell with all the other misguided do gooders.

So I won’t address your “points”, all of which are just opinion. As is mine. There’s no need to “discuss” opinions, because no one’s mind will be swayed.

Only history will establish whether any one is correct, and even then I’m not sure. My poker analogy is: it is mathematically “correct” to go “all in” with a pair of Aces. That I can “prove.”

But you still can lose and I have. So whether one “wins” or “loses” does not mean it was or wasn’t correct.

However, I will say that outcome trumps everything. Whether you were “right” is irrelevant if you lose. Ask the Native Americans.

And Rocky, all politics is personal. It is naivite, in my opinion, to believe politicians are looking out for the “common good.” Politics is about power, that is all.

The belief that the government is looking out for us is exactly why we receive BOHICA on a regular basis. Government cannot be reformed.

I’m living well; that’s all I care about. Anyone who wants to care about the world, democracy, justice or whatever, can be my guest. There’ll be no argument from me. That’s what freedom is about. Including the freedom not to care, which is my choice.

Don’t suggest that government allows me that freedom; that view is the statists’ position.(Anyone who is not an anarchist is a statist, so don”t take that the wrong way.)

Government is an artifice; it gives nothing. It only takes away freedom and leaves us with some. Very Orwellian to then say that government “gives” us the freedom it did not take.

How it can viewed any other way is beyond me.
So many folks are in Plato’s cave. Seeing the shadows on the wall and thinking that is the reality. The one who manages to get out of the cave and return with tales of “reality” is then scorned as being insane.

I have left the cave. But I’m not coming back either. I’ve got more important business.

Feel free to make any points, but I will no longer reply. The others may be interested and I am happy to provide a forum. I just wish there was a more “engaged” anarchist willing to advocate the cause. But of course our mindset is not favorable to organization….

Right now, finishing up getting organized for going on vacation the week before Thanksgiving is much more important than the welfare of the world.

And PT..I have no clue about the White House. But then, I’m not sure what your “argument” is either. Not that it will any any effect on my thinking….

I don’t expect to either influence or change your opinions, but would you kindly consider some of the flaws in your diatribe:

1)You ask: What do you think the decision would be if there was a law that every military age son and daughter of every Congressional representative supporting war would be sent to the front lines? Actually it would be much much worse than the current circumstance: It’s a straw man argument: e.g. what do you think a President would decide if his wife and children were taken hostage by terrorists and he was blackmailed into strategic surrender. In fact, the EXACT OPPOSITE makes a lot more sense. A politicians’ children should NOT be permitted to serve in the front lines EXACTLYbecause it may influence his/her decisions that affect the wellbeing of the entire nation. Not just our soldiers.

2) You refer to the recent “Big Three.” Actually, you are curiously overlooking the Iraq invasion of Kuwait…i.e. Gulf War I. (One could argue that it was a strategic mistake to have left Saddam in power back then!…instead of demanding an unconditional surrender.)

3) You choose to ignore the fact that the best way to avoid war is to have a powerful military that is both a deterrent and able to project power.

4) I suggest that you read up a bit more on the America First movement. Although you were correct that some high profile politicians were members, its ideology was virulently anti-semitic, racists, and tolerant of nazi ideology. Fakename and Fakesister would be appalled.

I am not at all sure you are correct about Iraq.

But Afghanistan was definitely in our National interest and when I listen to the Military in the field they make a good case for continuing it. I know I am not in the minority to remember where 911 came from and how devastating it was to our National Security and Economy.

Your central points of no government and isolationism just are not realistic arguments and must always conclude in unsubstantiated philosophical generalities. I respond, just to let you remember that there is a considered response to wishful thinking and no place for it in real government. It is fun around the fireside but not in the Whitehouse.

Oh BTW here’s another bit of trivia for you and I wager you can’t find the entire answer on the internet. When and how did the Whitehouse get its name and what was significant about it. It’s actually germane to my argument.