@clevfan4life said:

East Cleveland?

@browns149 said:

presiding over an uninhabited wasteland eh? Actually, we could have filmed the mad max trilogy there quite righteously.

@clevfan4life said:

I didn't say "WE" had to live there.

But, "WE" could stop anyone else from living there

@browns149 said:

See the land of Israel for why that wouldn't work. Who would live there? You'd be living inside a concrete box. We'd have to kick every Arab out of our new land. Would you sign up to go live there? Then of course there's that pesky global thing where if we did that, basically the whole global community would start to shift away from us. Our current ridiculously mismanaged monetary structure would crumble if the dollar wasn't the worlds reserve. Being the reserve has allowed us to play monopoly. We wouldn't have a lot of the goodies we do now if it weren't for that. We leveraged the long term health of our economy for short term global dominance. The hope is that to the world, we become too big to fail. That and we promised to hold everyone's gold reserves and now won't give it back, true story read up on it.

We go to war, and then we leave.....

Why didn't we just take the land and claim it for the USA?

That worked when we took "THIS" land from the people that had it

Why do we have to give it back to the fools that can't control it to start with?

@logicisforsquares said:

right, the end is just around the corner. Another 300 or so bombs should fix it no question.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

If they did the world would be an infinitely better place. Unfortunately it's populated by primates like yourself.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

The blatant evidence infront of you nose that empirically refutes your assertion is blatant. You're just an old moron who can't understand that just going somewhere and kicking someone's ass doesn't cut it anymore. It comes back now, and stronger than before. This isn't my opinion, it's factual evidence infront of all of us. You're just a minion of the devil at this point if you think just one more war will solve everything. One more invasion, more death more death. Do you chant that before bed?

@westside-steve said:

Now we're getting somewhere. Ok so 1) It's not ok for another country to buy and sell "THEIR OWN" goods and services in whatever currency they choose? AAANNNNDDD 2) Do you understand WHY we might have gotten fucked if Hussein had traded in Euro's? Do you understand what a shit money creation scam we're running that we can't allow foreign countries to get off the dollar? Keep working down this line. It would have helped if you had paid attention to Ron Paul the last couple years, this was exactly the kind of shit he was talking about.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

No I am just saying that we should stay there because it shouldn't take long for the Middle East to stop being Retarded. A year tops and they will all decide to stop chopping each other's heads off for Allah.

@logicisforsquares said:

Being Retarded? Wtf does that mean? American military go where called, and we do kick ass. You don't give up like you pussies want to, that is the attitude of you punks.

@clevfan4life said:

2) Yes bombing brown people is a fav past time of ours.

Pastime is one word. My god you're such an illiterate.

@clevfan4life said:

Thank God most people don't think like your sorry ass.

@clevfan4life said:

nope sorry it isn't. No matter how hard you close your eyes and click your heels together.

Assuming you are referring to Iraq had Saddam Hussein gone ahead and started trading the world's second-largest oil reserve in Euros it would have fucked us royally. You could make a better case for allowing him to invade Kuwait.

WSS

@oldbrownsfan said:

because they're idiots, we get it. You knew that was comig though. In any case, we can't have multiple administrations beholden to a previous admins mistake. It's a religious civil war that's been going on since before we were a country...almost 10 times longer than we've been a country, you get that right? You intrinsically understand this right? So the argument you're making is to throw more lives and more money at a mistake? That's the definition of stupidity.

You can talk all you want about previous lives, but what about the future lives we'd be throwing away there? Do you see the circuitous perpetuity of your standpoint? So we keep soldiers there for another 10 years and a thousand more die. In 10 years people are calling for withdrawal...well hold on a second what about the lives lost the last 10 years? It would literally never end.

@westside-steve said:

nope sorry it isn't. No matter how hard you close your eyes and click your heels together.

Biden was calling Iraq one of Obama's greatest achievements not that long ago. Once Obama pulled the troops out and the country fell apart it was back to blaming Bush and it was all Bush's fault again.

@clevfan4life said:

No they didn't need bombed. Unless of course you by the theory that everything that happens on the planet is the business of the U.S. Which it isn't.

☆sure it is☆

And that thinking is why we're almost broke country now.

☆actually more the opposite☆

Other than that, U.S. 'Leadership" doesn't want to project a will to win. I don't want the U.S. to be the worlds police, and I have difficulty with a lot of our actions being just. It would be easier to take if we would fight to win, instead to me it seems like long wars to keep military contractors in business who then donate to politicians who then award contracts to military contractors.

I'd rather put those troops in the U.S. - Mexican border and sort that shit out then have people die piecemeal in Afghanistan - shot on purpose by our "allies" in the region.

@westside-steve said:

Well, they are the ones that need bombing the most.
Ya wanna bomb Iceland?

WSS

Bob Woodward was right about this:

"As for President Barack Obama's decision to leave no residual force behind when American troops left Iraq in December 2011, Woodward indicated it would have been better to have left 10,000-15,000 troops behind as "an insurance policy" as military commanders suggested.

"We have 30,000 troops or more in South Korea still, 65 years or so after the war," Woodward said. "When you’re a superpower, you have to buy these insurance policies, and he didn’t in this case. I don’t think you can say everything is because of that decision — but clearly a factor."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/george-wbush-weapons-of-mass-destruction-iraq-war/2015/05/24/id/646530/

@clevfan4life said:

1) well we spy on everyone technically. We still have bases there though for the Rooskies.

2) Yes bombing brown people is a fav past time of ours.

Well, they are the ones that need bombing the most.

Ya wanna bomb Iceland?

WSS