TGHusker Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Sarah Palin got this one right regarding Syria. On U.S. military intervention in Syria’s civil war, where “both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line ‘Allahu akbar’ … I say let Allah sort it out.” Good editorial by Pat Buckanan - http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/the-palin-doctrine/ A portion of the article: Four fundamental changes make it “no longer realistic, or even desirable, for the U.S. to dominate” the Middle East as we did from the Suez crisis of 1956 through the Iraq invasion of 2003. The four changes: the failures of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the Great Recession, the Arab Spring and emerging U.S. energy independence. Indeed, with $2 trillion sunk, 7,000 U.S. troops dead, 40,000 wounded, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans dead, and millions of refugees, what do we have to show for this vast human and material waste? Can a country with an economy limping along, one that has run four consecutive deficits in excess of $1 trillion, afford another imperial adventure? On the Shiite side of the Syrian civil war are Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hezbollah and Syrian President Bashar Assad. On the Sunni side are the al-Qaida-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, Sunni jihadists from across the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Is victory for either side worth yet another U.S. war? Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Palin is as radical as the people she's denouncing and it's as dangerous to listen to her as it is to listen to any radical muslim cleric. 5 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 21, 2013 Author Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Palin is as radical as the people she's denouncing and it's as dangerous to listen to her as it is to listen to any radical muslim cleric. Now that is an overstep of a statement. - note: I'm not a Palin fan either but I think she is right on this one. If you didn't read the article, it is about keeping the US out of any more entanglements in the MidEast. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Sarah Palin got this one right regarding Syria. On U.S. military intervention in Syria’s civil war, where “both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line ‘Allahu akbar’ … I say let Allah sort it out.” On the Shiite side of the Syrian civil war are Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hezbollah and Syrian President Bashar Assad. On the Sunni side are the al-Qaida-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, Sunni jihadists from across the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Is victory for either side worth yet another U.S. war? Looks to me like that part of the world has no shortage of interested parties and leadership capabilities. I say let em handle it, destroy it - whatever, and the US can STFO. Of course, since that is the same position Palin has, it must be wrong It's too bad that we struggle to give credit where it is due based on a persons past transgressions or party affiliation. Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Palin is as radical as the people she's denouncing and it's as dangerous to listen to her as it is to listen to any radical muslim cleric. Now that is an overstep of a statement. Not in the slightest. Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Sarah Palin got this one right regarding Syria. On U.S. military intervention in Syria’s civil war, where “both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line ‘Allahu akbar’ … I say let Allah sort it out.” On the Shiite side of the Syrian civil war are Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hezbollah and Syrian President Bashar Assad. On the Sunni side are the al-Qaida-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, Sunni jihadists from across the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Is victory for either side worth yet another U.S. war? Looks to me like that part of the world has no shortage of interested parties and leadership capabilities. I say let em handle it, destroy it - whatever, and the US can STFO. Of course, since that is the same position Palin has, it must be wrong It's too bad that we struggle to give credit where it is due based on a persons past transgressions or party affiliation. Why do you think she's wrong? Link to comment
carlfense Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I think Palin is as radical as the people she's denouncing and it's as dangerous to listen to her as it is to listen to any radical muslim cleric. Link to comment
rawhide Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 No difference than asking God to bless Planned Parenthood ??? Link to comment
NUance Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Regardless of what anyone thinks of Sarah Palin, I agree with her on this one. 1 Link to comment
carlfense Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 Regardless of what anyone thinks of Sarah Palin, I agree with her on this one. It'd be easier for me to agree if we didn't need access to their oil . . . Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 21, 2013 Author Share Posted June 21, 2013 Regardless of what anyone thinks of Sarah Palin, I agree with her on this one. Yes, the point of the post is not Palin - but the position of the USA not getting entangled. We too often don't see the message because of our bias against the messenger. Forest and tree thing. Shoot, I'm beginning to enjoy Carl's and some of the other more left leaning posts - just to better understand their positions - I'm willing to listen, learn and moderate if it is reasonable. I hope those more left leaning would do the same as the situation may arise. Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 21, 2013 Author Share Posted June 21, 2013 Regardless of what anyone thinks of Sarah Palin, I agree with her on this one. It'd be easier for me to agree if we didn't need access to their oil . . . The noose around our next we need to get rid of - by any means possible- Drill baby Drill - oops I think another Palin quote. Link to comment
carlfense Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 The noose around our next we need to get rid of - by any means possible- Drill baby Drill - oops I think another Palin quote. - note: I'm not a Palin fan either . . . 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 21, 2013 Author Share Posted June 21, 2013 The noose around our next we need to get rid of - by any means possible- Drill baby Drill - oops I think another Palin quote. - note: I'm not a Palin fan either . . . funny Carl - I knew that would get a reply. One doesn't have to be a fan to agree with something someone said. I bet I've agreed with something Obama has said before - perhaps even more than one thing I have even agreed with you a few times - that deserves a double :ahhhhhhhh In fact, I'll go on record to state I think you are a pretty intelligent guy worthy of :ahhhhhhhh 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 21, 2013 Share Posted June 21, 2013 I'm pretty sure I'd agree with some of the thoughts/feelings of even the worst of human beings out there, but that doesn't mean I'm going to use them as sources for my opinions on message boards. We're being told to ignore the messenger and listen to the message. But when the messenger you use is so divisive, someone who's used such hateful language throughout her public career, the message inevitably gets clouded. There's clearly a disconnect here. Either you're a Palin fan putting her quote here because you're promoting her and her cause or you really don't get the concept of how to present a concise, agreeable message. Link to comment
Recommended Posts