BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

[email protected]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:14:05 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 21:03:48 -0800, wrote:

On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 21:05:34 -0500, wrote:

It might survive as 2 countries.

Then there would be Pakistan, North Pakistan and Outer Pakistan.

East Iran and North Pakistan.

I don't disagree with your analysis. I hope that causes you angst.

It does give you pause doesn't it.

I think it is encouraging that we are actually having a civilized
conversation and actually agreeing on something ;-)

Someone please explain to me in polite terms how the leaders of two
administrations, the current one and the one in the immediate past,
hoodwinked themselves into believing anything worth saving could be made
from either Iraq or Afghanistan.

I understand what Bush I did with his war with Iraq. It was rational. I
understand what Clinton did in Bosnia. That was rational.

Iraq? Afghanistan? Huh?

I think the ultimate blame still comes back to GHWB. If he had
actually brought our troops home in 1991 like he was advised, we would
not have been in any of this.

Clinton could have pulled the plug too but he didn't. It just went
down hill from there.

So, he should have listened to his generals? Just a while ago, you
were claiming he shouldn't have. Pick one please.

I have never changed my opinion about Iraq. I have always said get out
now.

Listening to generals will give you their plan to win, not whether you
should be there at all.

So, in a war you don't want to know how to win, you just want to
decide without any facts. If the opinion polls say get out, then get
out. Is that what you're claiming?