It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Analysts Ponder U.S. Basing in Iraq!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Well I think we need to leave at some point but the $$$ it would bring the iraqi's plus stability would be a boon.

Maybe only IF the Iraqi's want us there.......

Sure would tick Germany off



WASHINGTON During the first presidential debate, Sen. John Kerry suggested that the U.S. military is planning to make 14 bases now in Iraq "a permanent concept."

While the major media overlooked the remark, instead critiquing the style and performance of the candidates, security analysts are debating whether the United States plans to use the bases, in various stages of construction, as strategic U.S. outposts in the broader War on Terror (search).

John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, an Alexandria, Va., outfit that specializes in gathering national security and defense data, said researchers at his firm culled military news dispatches and can "conclusively identify" nine of these so-called "enduring bases," and possibly three more that are "too vague to pin down."


www.foxnews.com...




posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:57 PM
link   
And I thought when I opened this, it was going to be non Bush/Kerry thread...
why, I dunno. Do you think you could actually be doing more harm than good with the constant Bush pushing? Maybe actually turning people towards Kerry ya think?



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
And I thought when I opened this, it was going to be non Bush/Kerry thread...
why, I dunno. Do you think you could actually be doing more harm than good with the constant Bush pushing? Maybe actually turning people towards Kerry ya think?


In here the odds are pretty slim, most liberals wouldn't know the truth if it bit them.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Well I think we need to leave at some point but the $$$ it would bring the iraqi's plus stability would be a boon.


I wonder if they'll make the Iraqis pay for the bases like the Japanese pay for the US bases over there?



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Why do we even have military bases overseas anyway?

Wouldn't you like the military to be home? I mean really, you know Marines are within 24 hours of anything, which probably wouldn't happen as much if we did not have bases covering the globe which might seem a BIT Imperialistic.

Waste

of

Time.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


In here the odds are pretty slim, most liberals wouldn't know the truth if it bit them.



Well, I wouldn't know about that, but I do "think" that you are intelligent enough to know you can not group a whole people together in a negative light, just because they don't light candles and worship Bush the way you do....your obsessed and fanatical and everyone know that anything taken to excess...is not healthy and usually requires professional help!


[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
When I first saw this I thought the title said "Analysts Ponder U.S. Bashing in Iraq!"
I have no doubt that at least half of them will remain fully operational, regardless if they want us there or not. For one I think it will be a long time before any type of stability is obtained. Maybe 10 years, unless the playing field changes to Iran, then we could see insurgent attacks die down in Iraq, but move here...

damn tag...

[edit on 31-10-2004 by TrickmastertricK]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV

Well, I wouldn't know about that, but I do "think" that you are intelligent enough to know you can not group a whole people together in a negative light, just because they don't light candles and worship Bush the way you do....your obsessed and fanatical and everyone know that anything taken to excess...is not healthy and usually requires professional help!


[edit on 10/31/2004 by LadyV]


In all fairness, you are right. But you have not read all my posts, I do not in any way 'worship' Bush, I just think of the two he is far and away the better. There are other people I would like to see in office, but they are not running. The reason I am so pro Bush in HERE, is that I am the ONLY one. Most everyone else is voting for a man who will not disclose information that should be disclosed.

I attempt to be the biased poster for the right to counter the overwhelming lean to the left in ATS.

I will give you an example of the double standard in which I speak.


Just what kind of crap would the left be saying if Bush had never signed the 180 form? Would that have made the major networks? Hell the Dems are ready to take fraudulent documents to nail Bush, whilst their candidate openly refuses to release his.

And the press?


Well I ahve not even heard the term 180, even on FOX.

One thing, you might not like me and thats fine, but you cant say you didnt know....

[edit on 31-10-2004 by edsinger]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   
You know bwtter than that Ed! You are in no way the only one at ATS that for Bush!



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
You know bwtter than that Ed! You are in no way the only one at ATS that for Bush!


Well one of the VERY few.

Can you answer the 180 question? I mean if Bush hadnt signed his?



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


Can you answer the 180 question? I mean if Bush hadnt signed his?
I can't answer many political questions Ed...I'm not overly political, but I do know whom I do and do not care for. I do have my gut instincts and I study as much as I can before making a decision...can you answer all the questions and know your 100% your correct? No, you can't!



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV

Originally posted by edsinger


Can you answer the 180 question? I mean if Bush hadnt signed his?
I can't answer many political questions Ed...I'm not overly political, but I do know whom I do and do not care for. I do have my gut instincts and I study as much as I can before making a decision...can you answer all the questions and know your 100% your correct? No, you can't!


Well take a stab at it. I mean if one candidate is holding something like this from public view, dont you want to know?



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Okay Edsinger, here is the what Kerry was doing in the 20-year "gap" that he won't talk about: msnbc.msn.com...

And it makes total sense as to why it is not talked about - voters would not connect with what he was doing. What he was doing was quite interesting indeed.

There is definitely more to this man than meets the eye. I don't support Kerry, nor do I support Bush, but I find their histories quite interesting.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:42 AM
link   

In here the odds are pretty slim, most liberals wouldn't know the truth if it bit them.




Too funny Ed, too funny.





posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Ed whats with the grand, sweeping generalisations? And when someone points them out, you barely concede without quickly brushing it off out of your view and spout more rubbish.

First it was:
You are the only one here that is pro bush
Which changed to:
I am one of the VERY few here that are pro bush

lol do you even know what you are typing? It's propaganda, and VERY bad propaganda at that. There are many "Reds" here Ed, and thats not mentioning those who don't where the campaign contribution tags.

Assuming we are the personification of such stupidity only reinforces your own bud.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Ed, do you have to bring up the 180 form in EVERY post you start or participate in? Kerry server honorably in Vietnam, Bush didn't, get over it.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Sensfan, Kerry self-served, but that is another topic altogether.

Anyway...

Jethro, I understand what you are saying, but I'd rather themilitary be poitioned to hit the enemy before they amass in this continent.

When I served (notice, served, not self-served! LOL! ) in Germany, it was much better that we were there to stop the Soviets from even thinking that attacking Europe would be a good thing. Better that than to have sat in the states and watch Europe fall.

As to whether or not Iraq would be a good place, they pay much smarter people than me to figure such things out, and, like Ed said, it depends on whether or not the Iraqis would welcome such an idea.

BTW, I didn't read Ed's words as being pro-anyone, I read it to mean that the commentators should be analyzing the words instead of who looked better in a debate environment. I'm not saying I am right, I'm just saying what I read into the post.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:32 AM
link   
I know it's been talked about to death in other threads, but ask Mr. Rassmann, whos life was saved by Kerry, if he was self serving...

www.opinionjournal.com...



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:39 AM
link   
You're right, it has been, and his lapses and changes have been pointed out.
Good thing all officers didn't tuck tail and run for a political career after 3 papercuts in four months; the NCO corps can't carry the whole load, you know!

(Well, some of us could. Shoot, you can even trust the non-com with the compass!
)



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by Thomas Crown
Kerry self-served


Oh,puhleeaze, Kerry volunteers for Viet Nam and one of the most dangerous wartime missions... as a Swift Boat captain. He's attacked for being an opportunist; a man who put his life in jeopardy in an treacherous war so that he could run for president thirty-five years later.Kerry volunteers for Viet Nam, and he's an opportunist.

But, Bush slides past a few thousand less advantaged boys into the National Guard, cutting out early to work in the foxholes of a political campaign, and he's served honorably?



originally posted by Thomas Crown Good thing all officers didn't tuck tail and run for a political career after 3 papercuts



He gets wounded three times while serving our country and is castigated for not being wounded badly enough.

The National Guard gives Bush an honorable discharge and talk radio says that alone should prove his honorable service.

The Navy says that Kerry's medals were legitimate and talk radio brings on the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" gang to say that it sounds fishy.

Kerry saves a fellow soldier in the middle of enemy fire and is ripped because he only saved him after he came back for that soldier. I still can't figure out what part of that one was bad... but that doesn't matter. It stuck...
...but, whatever, because that's just left wing propaganda, and it's not like we'd know the truth if it bit us, right?

originally posted by Thomas Crownthe NCO corps can't carry the whole load, you know!

(Well, some of us could.


No-you couldn't. I was in the military long enoug to know that the much vaunted "non-coms" are as #ed up as the CO's.(mind-you may have been a very rare exception though I really doubt it-no offense intended...)




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join