Quote:
Originally Posted by peragro
I think it's safe to say that had we adopted any of the three resolutions I listed as law, we would be royally screwed at this point.
|
I agree with you with respect to HJR 73 and SJR 36, but a plan along the lines of SJR 33 might make some sense. Or it might be a disaster. I'm not qualified to say. My point, though, is that none of the plans include any appeasement of anybody.
Quote:
|
...BTW, I didn't make up those positions listed in the resolutions I posted. They were written by Democrats in positions of authority. I didn't attribute to them something they didn't say. This really is the position of at least one Senator and presidential candidate and 106 representatives. All of whom are in positions of authority...
|
Make them up? Who said anything about making things up? I have no doubt that your post was accurate.
Quote:
|
The ONLY way that over-the-horizon forces can participate in any military situation is via an air campaign. Essentially, the message is, "you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone - otherwise we'll bomb you.". We've already seen how that works out in Lebanon. In fact, isn't one of the major criticisms of how things in iraq have gone so far lack of ground forces?
|
You are getting into things that are way over my head, but at least you seem to have backed off your claim that the Democrats have proposed that if we leave the terrorists alone and they will leave us alone.
Quote:
|
I'll stick with the dictionary definition of diplomacy, it involves more than just listening.
|
That's true. Your earlier post said that diplomacy involved "talking your way out of trouble, or talking about things." My intent was to point out that you left out the most important part of diplomacy - listening.