Comments on: John McCain Stakes His Campaign On Iraq & Other News From The Forever War

By: superdestroyer

superdestroyer — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 01:26:11 +0000

Chris,

No matter what Senator Obama says publicly, his policy proposals would mean a military not capable of supporting military operations in Pakistan. However, I suspect that his staff is not smart enough or experienced enough to realize what it takes to have a military that can conduct operations in remote corners of the world.

By: Slamfu

Slamfu — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:11:58 +0000

For some reason I feel a powerful urge to give McCain the benefit of the doubt whenever possible. I honestly feel that he doesn't want the bloodbath that would ensue after leave Iraq to happen and he's willing to do anything to prevent it. I can see why, its going to be all our fault that it was brought about. The other plan to pull out and get our guys out of harms way is another option, and frankly they both suck.

But to look at it and say we are winning and try to tell me things are getting genuinely better when it obviously is not just kills me.

By: ChrisWWW

ChrisWWW — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:59:37 +0000

SD,
Does sending the army into the border regions of Pakistan to find Bin Laden count as a humanitarian mission?

By: superdestroyer

superdestroyer — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:00:10 +0000

The problem with the ban submunition push is that there are too many Serbs, Arabs, and Iranians involved. It has the hidden agenda was wanting to cripple the U.S. military. The elimination of sub-munitions would basically eliminate indirect fire support from the U.S. Army and Marine Corps. It would cause the U.S. to give up the MLRS, ATACMS, SADARM, and other precision indirect fire munitions.

If Senator Obama follows through with his proposals, it would be very hard for him to justify have a military at all except to do humanitarian missions.