Why is chee(se)eney relevant in this conversation? I cannot understand how a failed vice president whose assessment of the result of his and bushie II’s war in Iraq can get all this face time on the news stations. Here he is, complaining about Obama’s reticence to put “boots on the ground” in the Middle East, but chee(se)eny fails to realize that the American people do not want to go to war and in response to that sentiment, Obama has stated repeatedly, he will not order our military back into combat. He, chee(se)eney, was dead wrong about everything he said about going into Iraq and we still have to listen to this idiot? News stations, please get a grip; come to your senses, anything chee(se)eny has to say, is irrelevant! If you don’t give him face time, he’ll crawl back under his rock.
Three things, Prez; never, never, definitively state “never”. Second, let a few senior republicans have a seat at the table of discussion; I did not say they had to have a controlling voice, but let them sit in.
Third, the republicans, who want war as a solution to every conflict, will not fund the kind of military that could be a deterrent to any aggression anywhere in the world, a “world cop”, so to speak, putting out skirmishes all over the globe, so say it, loud and clear. Remind them and the public, about how they cut the military budget in addition to closing down the government.
I am not a hawk, and not a proponent of warring. But there are times and places where and when, someone has to save innocent lives by pushing back against the antagonist, that is, if we can determine which side is guilty (a consequence of war). Isn’t that what “cops” do when they have not witnessed the incident. Like it or not, we’ve placed America in the position of keeping world peace. So we have to be judicious about when and where we step in.
I think Obama is on the right track. If Iraq will continue to exist in its present form, the Iraqi people must decide that. The question is, are these people Iraqi first and then Taliban, Sunni or Shi’a and are they willing to stop being barbarians, killing each other over how someone prays, or do they want terrorists in their midst with insane and clouded ideas about equality and freedom? That nation’s borders were drawn by Europeans, without regard to religious ideas and beliefs (which should not make a difference) which was somewhat accepted, as if you wanted to be one country. If you want to talk to your God, no one should care how you do it, in my opinion. There are a lot of people with ideas about how other people must worship. Who do they think they are to make such infringement on another person? That is the pinnacle of arrogance.
No one has answered my question about why this situation is an American problem? I know that bushie boy got us into Iraq with a lie, but what are allies for if they won’t step up and help find an answer now? If it takes a temporary partition to stop the killing then do that, a buffer zone with UN boots on the ground; if the other countries have the resolve for it. But I suspect that ISIS is not interested in stopping the violence. The different factions need to be careful about who they throw in with. Iraqis need to tell the world if they want an “Iraq”. From what I’ve heard, I don’t think these people want to live under ISIS rule with no democracy. They will soon find out that terrorists who have no regard for life, will not change when they rule.
A quickie on the penguin…
It sounds as if there may be more grief for him, from the fallout of bridge-gate. Interfering with interstate travel is a walk in the park compare to what he may be in for. Doling out federal dollars as a reward going along on political pet projects is against the law. Also using public funds, ala, Port Authority money as his personal cookie jar, for uses, other than it was meant for, is likewise unlawful. The penguin had better learn a new dance, the jailhouse shuffle!
I’m out, enough said!