Americans have no need for foreign troops on our soil, we won't
tolerate
that, it
---
too late
On Jan 20, 11:04 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's called "invasion"; and an act of war, which is what we did in Iraq,
> because the Saddam Hussein/Baath Party was a danger to the world, including
> the United States.
>
> The Taiban was training suicidal bombers to come and bomb the United
> States, even after the events at 9/11. We said "ENOUGH"!
>
> Top that off with the big big feeling of "Let's Go Kick Some Ass, We All
> Wanna Little Revenge" right after 9/11.
>
> Americans have no need for foreign troops on our soil, we won't tolerate
> that, it violates every principal of our very core, our very foundation.
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 3:21 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Imagine for a moment that somewhere in the middle of Texas there was a
> > large foreign military base, say Chinese or Russian. Imagine that
> > thousands of armed foreign troops were constantly patrolling American
> > streets in military vehicles. Imagine they were here under the
> > auspices of "keeping us safe" or "promoting democracy" or "protecting
> > their strategic interests."
>
> > Imagine that they operated outside of US law, and that the
> > Constitution did not apply to them. Imagine that every now and then
> > they made mistakes or acted on bad information and accidentally killed
> > or terrorized innocent Americans, including women and children, most
> > of the time with little to no repercussions or consequences. Imagine
> > that they set up checkpoints on our soil and routinely searched and
> > ransacked entire neighborhoods of homes. Imagine if Americans were
> > fearful of these foreign troops, and overwhelmingly thought America
> > would be better off without their presence.
>
> > Imagine if some Americans were so angry about them being in Texas that
> > they actually joined together to fight them off, in defense of our
> > soil and sovereignty, because leadership in government refused or were
> > unable to do so. Imagine that those Americans were labeled terrorists
> > or insurgents for their defensive actions, and routinely killed, or
> > captured and tortured by the foreign troops on our land. Imagine that
> > the occupiers' attitude was that if they just killed enough Americans,
> > the resistance would stop, but instead, for every American killed, ten
> > more would take up arms against them, resulting in perpetual
> > bloodshed. Imagine if most of the citizens of the foreign land also
> > wanted these troops to return home. Imagine if they elected a leader
> > who promised to bring them home and put an end to this horror.
>
> > Imagine if that leader changed his mind once he took office.
>
> > The reality is that our military presence on foreign soil is as
> > offensive to the people that live there as armed Chinese troops would
> > be if they were stationed in Texas. We would not stand for it here,
> > but we have had a globe-straddling empire and a very intrusive foreign
> > policy for decades that incites a lot of hatred and resentment towards
> > us.
>
> > According to our own CIA, our meddling in the Middle East was the
> > prime motivation for the horrific attacks on 9/11. But instead of re-
> > evaluating our foreign policy, we have simply escalated it. We had a
> > right to go after those responsible for 9/11, to be sure, but why do
> > so many Americans feel as if we have a right to a military presence in
> > some 160 countries when we wouldn't stand for even one foreign base on
> > our soil, for any reason? These are not embassies, mind you, these are
> > military installations. The new administration is not materially
> > changing anything about this. Shuffling troops around and playing with
> > semantics does not accomplish the goals of the American people, who
> > simply want our men and women to come home. 50,000 troops left behind
> > in Iraq is not conducive to peace any more than 50,000 Russian
> > soldiers would be in the United States.
>
> > Shutting down military bases and ceasing to deal with other nations
> > with threats and violence is not isolationism. It is the opposite.
> > Opening ourselves up to friendship, honest trade and diplomacy is the
> > foreign policy of peace and prosperity. It is the only foreign policy
> > that will not bankrupt us in short order, as our current actions most
> > definitely will. I share the disappointment of the American people in
> > the foreign policy rhetoric coming from the administration. The sad
> > thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome's did,
> > when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted
>
> > On Jan 20, 7:47 am, Pradeep Sharma <pradeep.pradeepsha...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Clip on American Foreign Policy - Should All American Citizens See This
> > > Video ??!!
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao461iG9UsA
>
> > > __._,_.___
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
