Enough is enough: Bring them home, period.

On radio this morning, Glenn looked at the troubling news of the day in a slightly different light. Glenn remains steadfast in his belief that the United States government must bring our servicemen and women home and not put troops on the ground in Iraq. This morning, he went so far as to “lead with his mistakes” and admit that liberals had the right idea back in the early 2000s when they opposed intervention in the Middle East. And yet despite all the forces at play that are trying to tear us apart, Glenn remained surprisingly optimistic about America’s future.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Below is an edited transcript of the monologue:

I want to the start in a different place. The media keeps saying we are a nation that is being torn apart at the seams. In some ways, I agree with them, only because we are not looking for the things that bring us together. The left and right, we can’t agree on anything, right? The only place we can find common ground is in the hatred of one another. That’s the narrative that everybody is giving you. Unfortunately, there is some truth to that, unless we decide to look for more.

We have been greatly divided. When the President burst out on the scene, he talked about how George Bush tore us apart with two wars and we had an economic disaster. A lot of people said, ‘He’s right. We were a mess.’ We really, truly were a mess in 2008.

I don’t think it’s gotten any better for the last five years. We have done nothing but watch our country and our families, our friends be ripped apart. We are deeper in debt. We are immersed in foreign wars. Our economy is much more fragile than it was in 2008. Racial tensions are higher than I have ever seen them. I’m 50 years old. I don’t remember an America that felt like this race-wise. We are far from reaching across the aisle. I shouldn’t say that. The Republicans and Democrats are perfectly fine reaching across the aisle. They are not only reaching across the aisle, they are reaching across the aisle and fondling each other. It’s just they are on the same exact page, and they will demonize. The Republicans are doing it, and the Democrats will do it. They will demonize anyone that steps out of line with the parties.

As bad as it has been, amazingly enough, lately, we seem to be finding areas where we all agree. There are things that are happening in America. For instance, the VA scandal. The VA scandal, Americans agree, is horrific. We need to plant our flag in some places where we know we are on the right side. Let’s start planting our flags where we can have some victory. That’s one of them: The VA scandal. Let’s start reaching across to people in our neighborhood, our friends who vote differently than us, on things like the VA scandal. There’s tons of blame. The President campaigned in 2008 on the VA saying that it was completely out of control. Now it’s much worse now, but that’s the place we could start. George Bush screwed it up. I know. It was horrible. Good. Your guy didn’t do anything, so let’s fix it now.

We will be coming together to stop Common Core. I can’t tell you how remarkable this Common Core thing is. When Bill Gates comes up and gives a speech: ‘How about we call it a two-year hiatus? Just give it two years, see if it works. If it doesn’t, we’ll just give up. Let’s do that.’ Really? They’re letting Justina [Pelletier] go probably in the next couple of weeks too. We’re on to you, Bill.

Here’s the great thing: No matter how much money you are spending to sell us this load of bull crap, Americans aren’t buying it. It is not just the right. It’s the left too. It’s the teachers. It’s the Chicago teachers union. Could we get any more left than that? The Tea Party standing side-by-side with the Chicago teachers unions? That’s fantastic.

America is healing herself. I really want to talk to you about this compass I have been working on. I have said for a while that there’s going to come a time when everything you know is upside down, when what you thought was solid would be liquid and liquid will be solid. Up is down, down is up. What was right will be wrong. Good will become evil. And there will be nothing that you recognize or can count on. I have said that for probably eight years. The time is here.

We are headed in exactly the wrong direction. We are at the polar opposite now of where we should be going. That’s not a conservative saying that. I believe that’s anyone with any common sense. ‘We should be doing more testing on our kids?’ Come on. You know that’s not right. ‘We should have more Islamic oversight in our Department of Homeland Security.’ You know that’s not right. ‘We should spend more money to get out of debt.’ You know that’s not right. ‘We should rush doctors and nurses and build emergency centers for the people who are coming across our borders, and they are coming here illegally and we are putting them on military bases.’ Meanwhile, we can’t get the military to be able to get in to see a doctor for things like cancer. You know that’s not right.

Maybe we could come together now on this nightmare in Iraq. From the beginning, most people on the left were against going into Iraq. I wasn’t. At the time I believed that the United States was under threat from Saddam Hussein. I really truly believed that Saddam Hussein was funding terrorists. We knew that. He was funding the terrorists in Hamas. We knew that he was giving money. We could track that. We knew he hated us. We knew that without a shadow of a doubt. It wasn’t much or a stretch to believe that he would fund a terror strike against us, especially since he would say that. So I took him at his word.

There were also atrocities that were happening in Iraq torture chambers, mass graves. At the time, the unanimous belief – even with Hillary Clinton and everybody else – was that he had weapon of mass destruction. There was also the element – and this is really what spoke to me – of bringing freedom to the people of Iraq for the first time in their long history. I don’t want to control Iraq, but I have a soft spot for people who are being tortured and just want freedom because I really, truly believe Democrats and Republicans are the same. Israelis and Palestinians are the same. Once you get the politicians to leave the room, once you can deprogram people from what the politicians and leaders have said, everyone is pretty much the same. It’s like, ‘I just want to be left alone.’ ‘I just want to raise my family, have fun.’ ‘I want a decent life.’ Then politicians get involved and program us to hate each other. You have to be carefully taught who to hate.

Now, in spite of the things I felt at the time when we went into war, liberals said: We shouldn’t get involved. We shouldn’t nation-build. And there was no indication the people of Iraq had the will to be free. I thought that was insulting at the time. Everybody wants to be free. They said we couldn’t force freedom on people. Let me lead with my mistakes. You are right. Liberals, you were right. We shouldn’t have.

Now, if you believed those things, let me say: You were right. If you were just using it for political purposes, well, we don’t have anything in common, But if you really believe those things, I would like to have a conversation with you now to find out exactly how you came to terms with that – especially being a progressive. If you know the history of the progressive movement, it was Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson that started imposing democracy in South America. The reason why South America is just loaded with communists is because we put a lot of them in. That’s the progressive ideal.

But I agree with you: You cannot force democracy on the Iraqis or anybody else. It doesn’t work. They don’t understand it or even really want it. They may be too immersed in their own belief of Sharia Law to embrace liberty or at least at this time. If people vote for Sharia Law, they vote for Sharia Law. We tried. What can we do? We have lost thousands of American lives. We have lost thousands of lives on the Iraqi side and tens of thousands have been wounded. We have spent $2 trillion – say that again – $2 trillion, and upwards of 200,000 Iraqi citizens, aid workers, insurgents have been killed. That’s the conservative number. Liberals will tell you it’s almost 1 million people. I don’t know what the number is, but after all of that, hundreds of thousands of lives, $2 trillion, the best minds in the world trying to do it, it’s about to fall apart.

Terrorists of the most radical kind – maybe the most radical we have witnessed since Nazis – are now poised to overrun the capitol city. All of our effort, all our sacrifices, all of it is gone. $1 billion embassy, which I contend, I have nothing to back it up except my gut, that’s not an embassy. It is a listening station. There’s something wrong with that embassy. You don’t build something that big in Baghdad. How many of us are going, ‘I’m going to vacation in Baghdad. Hope they have a nice embassy’? What do we have it there for? Why is it that big? Something is wrong with that.

But, anyway, all of that is gone. And yet, this is something I think that we can come together with, on the right and the left. And it’s this – I have more of a chance of hacking off my loyal listeners and audience by saying this, but so be it: Not one more life. Not one more life. Not one more dollar, not one more airplane, not one more bullet, not one more Marine, not one more arm or leg or eye. Not one more.

The people of Iraq have got to work this out themselves. Our days of being the world’s policemen, our days of interventionists is over. If we are directly attacked, so be it. But this must end now.

Can’t we come together on that? Are we not all a people that can come together on that? Wedon’t want our sacrifice to be a waste. Let me ask you this question: What good will one more life do? To waste one more life, what good will it do, to waste another dollar, let alone another trillion? And conservatives, is there one that believes this President will prosecute a new war in Iraq properly? When the biggest hawk of them all, the Darth Vader of the entire galactic empire, Dick Cheney and George Bush didn’t prosecute it right? No. In the end, the result will be the same. Another group of radicals will pop up again. It is like a never-ending game of whack amole over there. The only way to prevent Baghdad from being overrun eventually is stay there and continue to fight this militarily in perpetuity. Are you willing to do that?

Don’t even start with me on your oil an gas. Guess we should have thought about that earlier. Maybe if we use our own oil and gas, we wouldn’t have to worry about this. Liberals, you were against it in the first place. How could you be in favor of more intervention now? How could you possibly be for that after everything you have said about how it’s going to fall apart in the end was right? Everything I said that we could hold it together was wrong.

We need to pull out and end the long nightmarish involvement in this mess. We need to do the same in Afghanistan, once and for all. I remember back in the 1970s, we were going to the moon and liberals at that time would say, ‘We have bigger problems here on earth that need to be taken care of.’ How much more is that argument correctly applied to today’s situation?

Finally, there are some things we can agree on. Finally, there are some things we can come together on and clean up our own house. But if we do to the liberals what they did to us and George W. Bush and make it just about politics, we will be divided more. This cannot become about the President. It cannot become act the Democrats. This has to become about the principles because in the principles we all agree. Enough is enough. Bring them home, period.

  • landofaahs

    Warn the Christians of the middle east to flee the countries run by muslims and then let the glass making begin.

  • Crassus

    Looks like old Blood and Guts Beck has gone over to the other side. He has one thing in common with Obamao. They’ve both lost their minds.

  • Missdaisy

    I will never listen to you again! You r spitting in the faces of our military men and women!

  • Don

    Glenn has been listening to too many Ron Paul speeches….the stick your head in the sand, and pretend we’re safe and sound within our own borders, speeches. One thing we learned from 9/11 is that this isn’t like any other war we’ve ever fought.

    We need an ongoing contingent in both Iraq and Afghanistan…to keep the murderous, beheading butchers at bay. We had all of our troops at home on 9/11. ‘Splain your rationale with that, Glenn. They tried the same thing in ’93

  • Missdaisy

    I keep reading this garbage not believing You wrote this junk, this is not anything like the Glenn Beck I used to listen too!

  • Thomas

    I am a member of the U.S. military, how is he spitting in our face?

  • Jamie

    I agree with him.

  • Robert Montoya

    I’m against sending troops because President Obama is the leader and, as such, he will not do what is necessary to win. He’s not even made clear what the mission is. If the mission is to destroy ISIS and Al Qaeda, then the only recourse is to order the Military to apply every available means to accomplish that mission swiftly. Attack the enemy everywhere and anywhere. Give them no quarter. Find and destroy all that feeds the enemy’s military strength. We can win this fight, but only if we reapply the Sherman doctrine of bringing Hard War to the enemy. We must have the same attitude that our World War II commanders had, which was to kill the enemy, and continue killing them until they get tired of it. We must read the Quran and use these extremists’ own religion against them like a cudgel. We must employ psychological warfare in addition to all of the above.

    President Bush wouldn’t do this. President Obama won’t do this. Instead, we will pursue the failed Vietnam era policy of sending our boys to be target practice. That is something I cannot condone. Fight to win, or bring them home. They deserve better than to be ordered to sacrifice in vain.

  • Hamma Time

    Glen, I honestly hope you really don’t believe we shouldn’t act on this. As much as I HATE (proper word for my feelings) 0bama (yes ZERO), we need to wipe out these ISIS losers sooner rather than later. Not doing so at this very moment could cost 20x the lives and 100x the $ down the road. Do not let these individuals entrench themselves and build up larger forces

    Had Clinton taken bin laden when he had the chance, the towers just may still be standing today, and we wouldn’t have gone into Afg in the first place. We would have saved 8,000 + US Citizens and military, and no less than several TRILLION dollars.

    The cost of 9/11 and its aftermath with the economy and wars could have been prevented. I do not want to be looking back at inaction on ISIS and have the same feeling. Killing these fools is worth the cost now.

  • Marcus

    Glenn, have you fallen off the wagon? Iraq was won in 2008. It was only the precipitous and hasty withdrawal that Choomie ordered that brought about the disaster. The proper course of action was to run Iraq under a military governor, for decades if needed, until a stable cadre of Iraqis could gradually take over, rather than pushing for elections at the earliest possible moment.

  • Rick
  • Marcus
  • Anonymous

    Certain people seem to thrive on some conflict and tribal skirmishes — it’s a way of life. It probably would have remained that way but other people had other ideas. Ideas that the Iraqi government and people are not willing to fight, kill and die for. But dying they are.

    At one time the Arabs and Persians may have been wary of dealing with the infidels. Now they just hate us.

  • Dennis LeDrew

    Okay, enough is enough.

    What is the point of bleeding and dying for a people that will NEVER understand the Western concept of freedom, that don’t want it? We’ve been doing this in some form or other for the last 40 years……and for what?

    I say we give the Middle East exactly what it wants – a 100% pull-out (except where Israel is concerned, because they are our ally), but with this caveat – “okay, you have what you want; America will no longer be involved in the Middle East andyou will be left strictly alone……..but now be warned! If subsequently ANY of our cities are bombed, if any of our citizens are taken, if any of our airlines are hijacked, one of your cities will be annihilated. If it happens again, we will turn Mecca and Medina into parking lots. This is your only warning. Govern yourselves accordingly”.

    If anyone thinks that this will simply create more martyrs and jihadists for Allah, think again: Japan once thought as they did, killing themselves in droves likewise in the name of their country/their god-emperor in a bid to fight to the bitter end. Two nukes later disabused them of that notion.

  • Jeff Lambeau

    Yes, since the women and children are Muslims, it’s ok for them to die. Bombing those countries isn’t going to solve anything. It’s only going make the rest of the world turn on us even more. You’re forgetting that China funds the Middle-East, so does Russia. If we mess up the Middle East, those two countries are going to be on our ass, and they have had the upper hand for a long time now.

  • Anonymous

    We are in a war the Bible told us about over 2 millennia ago it can be found in the Books of Daniel and Ezekiel. Daniel gives us a time table Ezekiel gives us snap shot of events. Example the Arab spring of 2011is the eleventh year in Ezekiel. God gives
    two events to verify this firsts Egypt over thought its leader in January 2011 and three months later in March Syria becomes a grave yard in a civil war that stretches into 2012. The great red line was drawn that year and turned into a white washed peace in December of 2012. Everyone must understand and observe that we are in the sixth month 14th year of Ezekiel’s war! We need to be careful walking into this grave yard where evil is destroying evil lest we fall into a pit! Glen feels this but does not understand it yet. Check it out and watch what God has hidden in plain sight!

  • Jeff Lambeau

    Ok, Nostradamus, take a nap. If I want to read fairytales, I’ll read Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones… not that boring crap written by eunuchs who were drunk off wine.

  • Harry Callahan

    I agree. In Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, we were there to win battles, not the war. The only way to win the war against the muslim terrorist is to threaten them with complete annihilation just as we did in Japan.

  • Joe Kaminski

    Glenn, you hit the nail on the head. Democracy and freedom do not work with Islam. Sharia Law is their government, and no other form of government is acceptable. Everyone knew when we pulled out of Iraq that another dictator will wind up in charge. Anyone that thought otherwise is a fool. At best you can hope for Iraq to be split into three sectarian states. More than likely we will see ISIS fully take over Iraq. The Iraqi people don’t have the will to defend themselves. Anyone that was sent over there to train their military can tell you they are lazy to the core. They had no desire to do their jobs and I think they have every desire to be led by another Hussein. The Afghani people are far less lazy than the Iraqis but again, if they can’t take care of themselves by now, almost 15 years later, then it’s not our problem anymore. Not one more life, limb, or injury. Not one damn dime. NOTHING should go to these countries. And that includes Israel. Stop interfering and let them all settle their differences the way they feel necessary. It’s not our problem, and we can no longer afford to make it our problem.

  • Joe Kaminski

    I agree with everything you said except Israel. I say pull out 100%. That also means cutting the leash we’ve had on Israel. The only reason the muslims still mess with Israel is because we haven’t allowed them to fully retaliate. I say pull out, cut the leash, and watch the muslims run like hell when Israel blows them off the map.

  • landofaahs

    China and Russia have a bigger muslim problem than we do. Don’t think for a moment that muslims don’t hate anyone who is not muslim or not their own kind of muslim.

  • You’reNoGandhi

    “This morning, he [Glenn] went so far as to “lead with his mistakes…..[ which were legion]…

    [ but now he has turned over a new leaf]…….I have more of a chance of hacking off my loyal listeners and audience by saying this, but so be it: Not one more life. Not one more life. Not one more dollar, not one more airplane, not one more bullet, not one more Marine, not one more arm or leg or eye. Not one more.”

    You’re no Gandhi, Glenn, but there’s hope for you. As far as those ” loyal listeners” go, many will come to realize what Iraq was/is a quagmire just as was Vietnam.

    Welcome to the anti-welfare-warfare revolution. Perhaps you can help add millions to the liberty movement.

  • landofaahs

    Babylon the Great is falling. If 10 years ago anyone had said that the middle east and Russia would be poised to converge on Israel, how many would have laughed their heads off? Does it seem very far fetched today? I’m not saying this is nearing the end…yet. I’ll wait until the other things must happen before I get to thinking it is. But even them it’s difficult to know. But it sure is starting to look like it. But just keep in prayer and be ready always.

  • Anonymous

    Never send an 0311 to do a W-76′s job.

  • VbVoice

    “Find and destroy all that feeds the enemy’s military strength?” Where are they getting their weaponry? The U.S. Where are they getting their $$? Oil bought by the U.S.

  • Jeff Lambeau

    “Iraq was won in 2008.”

    hahahahahaha wtf, are you off your medication or something?

  • Jeff Lambeau

    “Watch this, and then tell me we must not remove them from the earth.”

    ^nice Adolf Hitler quote

  • You’reNoGandhi

    Even the kids are catching on that “democracy” doesn’t work in “these countries”. This Call of Duty Advanced Warfare Trailer – with Kevin Spacey- says it all.

    America is a warmongering superpower; If the kids are learning, why can’t you?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKYHuhg0l3I

  • angryguy77

    While we’re at it, lets burn all the boats too….

    If there is a reason for being against this, it’s not because we can’t win, it’s due to who we have in charge of the military right now. The reasoning glenn uses is just faulty.

  • Joe Kaminski

    All of our troops were home on 9/11? So my unit was on an imaginary deployment to the middle east? And all those deployments since Desert Storm must have been imaginary too. Methinks you never served.

  • Joe Kaminski

    Yeah, I’m a disabled retired veteran married to an Active Duty member and I don’t think he spit in our face once. Just saying. It seems that the people who are quick to declare war are also the ones that aren’t willing to fight.

  • Anonymous

    Actually, they are doing a really good job of removing themselves from the earth. If we let them alone to fight amongst themselves who know how long it’ll be before everything is gone. Did you know that the terrorists who are doing civil war in Baghdad and other places in southern Iraq are supposed to be so dangerous that both Al-Quida AND the Taliban are scared of them? Heck, if the usual suspect are bothered then you KNOW the whole arab region is doomed. Time to bring our troops and our American way of life home and stat putting together daily sinkhole alerts so we can watch them destroy each other.

  • Malachi

    For two whole weeks after 9/11 the attitude in America echoed GWB’s statement that we were at war with terrorism and all those countries that harbored them. For 2 weeks…
    And then in that brief amount of time we lost our fervor and went back to watching The Sopranos, Jeopardy, or Millionaire.
    And then the political hacks got involved and turned the whole thing into “nation-building.”
    And we turned over in our comfy beds and went back to sleep.

    The right way to execute a war is to wipe out the enemy. It really is that simple. But if you can’t stomach the cost in lives and dollars that will be required to wipe out the enemy, then don’t get involved.

    We forgot that Iraq was a sovereign nation. They really are. They’re not a pawn of the U.S. They’re not a territory. They’re not even an ally. They WERE our enemy in 2011! And we thought … what? We could wipe out their government and build a democracy? That’s about as stupid as it gets, and it is NOT how to conduct a war. Forcing a particular form of government on another nation will create animosity, not democracy. We don’t even have a democracy…what makes anyone think we can impose that on someone else!?

    When the greatest military in the world is stymied by collateral damage, the war is essentially lost. When we won’t bomb 200 enemies because they’re standing in a graveyard, we deserve to be the butt of the world’s jokes. When low-impact guerrillas can outfight, outsmart, and outlast the U.S. Armed Forces, then it’s a sad, sad day.

    That is all…

  • Jeff Lambeau

    How many bad puns do you make out of Obama’s name on a daily basis… really, I’m curious to know.

  • Anonymous

    Jeff,
    you didn’t check it out! It’s not a fairy tale it is old because God
    demonstrates He can reach over 3 millennia if you check it out.

  • ken.

    the middle east is a lost cause, there is no way to fix it other then to just let them destroy themselves. they are not capable of living in peace with anyone including each other. it’s also just a distraction to keep our troop far away from home to set us up for an invasion. the democrats are in the it and opening our border to bring destruction upon us. if any middle eastern country attacks us then we can just send missiles until there is nothing left, problem solved. they don’t want freedom, they don’t have that concept in their vocabulary.

  • Don

    What a ridiculous straw-man argument. The topic is about getting our troops out of COMBAT…genius. Good grief. So many choice words to say, but I’ll try to keep it civil.

    BTW… “youthinks” wrong…. I was in the Army for 6yrs, serving 3 with the 101st, then 3 with the 82nd Abn Div (including the Persian Gulf War). In fact, I was graduating from Ranger School just after Sadaam invaded Kuwait, and joined my unit already there a few weeks later….so, I know there are units stationed/deployed in various places around the globe

    Want a little ketchup to go with that shoe leather?

  • Dennis LeDrew

    I only said as much because the idea of utterly abandoning a staunch ally doesn’t sit well with me.

    But you’re right, they are capable of looking after themselves when it comes to a fight. But since the 1970s, Israel has been one of the top recipients of US foreign aid. Clearly, they would not be enjoying that level of success otherwise. Would that continue to be the case if we just up and left utterly?

    LOL But then again, they also have nuclear weapons, so I suppose that they can make the same sort of ultimatum.

  • Joe Kaminski

    Straw man argument? You do realize that our refusal to leave post-Desert Storm was cited by Osama as a reason for his war on us, right? On multiple occasions he stated he wanted to banish us from his lands, aka: Saudi Arabia and the Middle East in general.

    Ok, so I was wrong to assume you never served. However, now knowing that you have served it boggles my mind that you would be advocating for MORE war. Guess your head must have smacked the side of my C-130 one too many times on your way out the troop door.

  • A-Train

    we thought the ‘bastion of civilization’ could actually make it into the current century. apparently not. bring our people home, secure the borders, stock up.

  • Don

    It’s not my fault you have trouble with reading comprehension! As I said…it isn’t about “wanting” more war. We got it whether we want it or not. It’s just like Israel. They are always in a conflict with Islamic Terrorist groups. This isn’t a singular campaign. What part of that don’t you understand?

    Plus, we have (for decades and decades) troops deployed or stationed around the globe…so how is it “Warmongering” to keep a small contingency force in place? Go stick your head back in the sand if you want to…won’t change the reality of the situation.

  • Native Pride 1973

    This is logic is the reasoning WHY we LOST Iraq! We are not fighting a military we are fighting terrorists who feed off this type of warfare to gain support among the people. Sending thousands of troops over there will only feed the support for the terrorists since the people view us not as “liberators” but conquerors.

    The “Sherman doctrine” will NOT work at all except encourage more and more young men to fight against the “evil American military”, in there eyes, and kill more of our troops. We are not fighting a country with borders. ISIS and AQ can slip away back to Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and where ever they have a solid base of support. The only way to beat them is to take away there base. The only way of doing that is to make the citizens hate them more then they hate you and we failed miserably in Iraq by placing Iraq under foreign military control and putting our own guy in power. The people showed us that much when they voted a anti-american, anti-occupation leader into power. Instead of sending in thousands of infantry and tanks to “occupy” the territory, we need to send in SF who are training in counter-terrorism and guerrilla warfare to eliminate the base of support and to train and lead the Iraqi forces to beat the terrorists, that would be the only way to gain support of the people.

    Then, use SEALS, Rangers, DELTA, MARSOC, CIA, etc to eliminate the heads and financiers of the groups in quick DA strikes because they are silent, better, and can get out without any prolonged military presence in Iraq. And I agree with your latter point, we should use the Qu’ran to build up support against the terrorist groups among the people.

    Also, 95%+ of all Iraqis HATE ISIS and AQ. They want they gone too, but they also despise foreign military occupation just as much. Just like EVERY AMERICAN would as well.

    I would highly recommend that you read the book “Horse Soldiers: The extraordinary story of a band of U.S Soldiers who rode to victory in Afghanistan”. These group of only a couple dozen SF literally rode on horse back to completely destroy the Taliban in Afghanistan, it wasn’t till after we sent thousands of troops in did they build up support again since, like I stated earlier, they despise foreign occupation.

    Finally, we lost Vietnam because we wouldn’t cross the border to eliminate the NVA even after we destroyed it after Tet and we couldn’t get the support of the people to eliminate the VC.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Bombing won’t help except to kill innocent women and children since most of those coward terrorists use them as body shields to protect against bombings and the such.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Actually, Israel has stated they they no longer need US troops for their protection anymore which is why we don’t need to have troops there for them. Israel can handle themselves and if they get in a really tight spot we have enough troops in bases in Europe and around the Horn of Africa to support them.

  • Don

    And as for your quoting Obama? That merely proves you are as clueless as he is. The man is a lying, conniving Marxist…who makes one major f-ck-up after another…a new one every week…and you want to quote him for source material?

    Obabam and his Liberal colleagues are America’s Trojan Horse. He wants to coddle and negotiate with these murderous, beheading b@stards. He’s the last person I’d quote to support my case.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Yep, lets totally use COD as a point in a military Foreign Policy discussion. That’s totally logical. /sarcasm

  • Joe Kaminski

    And you are trying to lecture ME on reading comprehension you dumb grunt? I didn’t mention obama once in my post. And usually if I do, I refer to him by the name he was raised with, soetoro. Reading comprehension > you. Not wholly unexpected from army.

  • landofaahs

    Age has nothing to do with it. The young ones will grow up to be as militant as their parents. When the enemy attacks you you must destroy them or they destroy you. It’s that simple. If you are willing to have your children killed then go ahead but some of us understand that evil must sometimes be destroyed. We do not want this war but it is not a choice. They are forcing it on us.

  • Don

    The leader of this group was RELEASED BY OBAMA from Gitmo in 2009…and to one up that cock-up, he just released the 5 worst of the Taliban (for one deserter and collaborator). The last words the Terrorist said, when released, was……”I’LL SEE YOU IN NEW YORK!!!”

    Notice he didn’t say in Baghdad, or Mosul….he was declaring his full intent. To spread his group until they had sufficient means to bring catastrophe here, to America. What part of that don’t you bleeding heart, clueless liberals….and Glenn Beck, too, it seems….understand? Obama is the America’s Trojan Horse, simply put. Every action he has taken weakens this nation further and further.

  • Crassus

    I could probably do two or three hundred but who’s counting? Hope that answers your question. You any relation to Curly Lambeau?

  • You’reNoGandhi

    It’s you who miss the point.

    The point is simple: The warmongering neocons are less intelligent than some of the gamer-kids who play games all day.. In the 1960s it was the young kids who were smoking pot all day (hippies) who understood they didn’t want to warmonger in a country that wanted a “worker’s paradise”. People like John McCain didn’t get it, viz., you can’t bring “democracy” to people who want collectivism. Fast forward to the Middle East: John and the other warmongers still don’t get it, viz., you can’t bring democracy to people who want a religious paradise (i.e., theocracy) just as you can’t bring democracy to people who want a “worker’s paradise, i.e., communism.

    Some of the kids have wised-up ahead of their elders…….. Some things never change.

    But, hey, if you want to go fight, then go. Pack up your crap and go make America proud……

  • Vince Fox

    Ron Paul accepts your apologies…

  • Monet

    I think I’ve finally had enough of watching Glenn Beck self-destruct.

  • Anonymous

    Only after he’s FIRST economically destroyed our country Glenn.

  • Anonymous

    They’re also part of the “Beast” in Revelations chapters 7, 11, and 18! Ouch! We’re in serious trouble folks…

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think that I would go so far as to call the lives sacrificed in the cause of freedom a waste.

  • TreyP

    I’ve come to the same conclusion as you Glenn. In hindsight we never should have invaded Iraq, but that realization will not solve the problem at hand. ISIS is a threat to regional security and could be a threat to American security if left unchecked. Completely destroying them would be immensely difficult, as they have enclaves in Syria and sending troops there would get messy fast. There is no good option in this situation, but the best would probably have to be a campaign to halt their advance, retake the captured cities, and twist Al-Malaki’s arm until he allows for more Sunni’s in the government. It’s not a guarantee of a good outcome but it is preferable to doing nothing.

  • Don Peterson

    What a load of Bolshevik. Even when nearly everyone agrees on the nature of the problem, there is a sharp and irreconcilable divide in how to fix it.

    Everyone deplores the VA scandal so what? On one side you have those who take that scandal as nothing more than a sign that we haven’t spent enough money or given bureaucrats enough power. The same goes for the disaster that is our government schools, the looming disaster of entitlements and illegal immigration.

    As for the navel gazing over Iraq, I’m pretty sure that the Kurds disagree with your assertion that “They don’t understand it [democracy] or even really want it.” And the thousands upon thousands of Iraqi’s who are fleeing the murderous psychopaths sure didn’t “vote for sharia”.

  • MJ McNamara

    I have to say- as someone you would call liberal ( I guess I’m more like a 1985 conservative ) as someone who has been influenced by the Fox News predilection to lie or distort – influenced by what I see as an anti-poor- anti-minority movement from the Right – influenced by what I see as a distortion of Christian values ( I’m a white Northeastern Catholic ) Influenced by the knee-jerk cheap-shots at our unremarkable president, especially the Muslim Kenyan stuff – influenced by the rudeness that I suppose is what passes for “tough talk”- all this and much much more hasn’t made me more progressive- but has made the progressives look like a more reasonable group to me- in a political landscape with few choices-two-it’s like they are at least trying. This Right-wing “burn it all down” stuff I view as insane. Shutdowns are insane. I’ve also been “pushed” left by the left’s ability to criticize our president- especially his pro-corporate stuff like the TPP. But more insane is our lack of unity. Allowing ourselves to take on the talking points of our power hungry “leaders”. I know people that shout “Benghazi!!”- and they have no idea why they are supposed to be angry about it- they just are. And I’ll reply- changing the terror warning color to orange before an election to scare people is worse, like Bush did- and I’ll point out the hypocrisy and then here comes the name calling- Liberal!! Socialist!! and all that- from regular people that share the same values or at least goals with- it’s like we have allowed ourselves to be divided and that makes us less powerful, almost irrelevant, and continues the status quo of gridlock. One side isn’t right EVERY SINGLE TIME and one side isn’t wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME. It’s got to the point where we can’t even debate because even the actual facts are excused away with some crazy conspiracy theory. We have become puppets it seems. We point fingers in the blame game with these a-ha!! moments we think confirm all our base accusations- and then I read this article. This article. It gives me hope from the most unlikely of places.
    My right-wing father in law will smile when I tell him Glenn Beck gave me hope.

  • Native Pride 1973

    I take it you missed the /sarcasm part? I’m not arguing with your point, it has good logic I just thought it was funny posting a COD trailer as your main point

  • Thomas

    He said Osama, not Obama.

  • Native Pride 1973

    So basically you are advocating for the mass killing of innocent women and children because they MIGHT one day grow up and become terrorists. WOW. Hopefully I a entirely wrong in that assumption.

    Secondly, bombing won’t be successful because of the very reason you stated. we bomb and kill dozens of innocent people and so dozens more will join their cause for revenge. Like I stated in a post above we don’t bomb them into submission that doesn’t work. This isn’t WWII. We aren’t fighting a country. We bomb them here we don’t solve anything because ISIS and AG can go anywhere they have support. The only way to defeat them is to take away their base. And we do that by sending in SF who are specifically trained in counter-terrorism, Foreign Internal Defense, and guerrilla warfare and who are trained to work with the people to defeat terrorists and to build support among the people. Its why they are known as Soldier-Diplomats and force multipliers. Also, JSOC and SEALS, MARSOC, Rangers, etc eliminate the high threat terrorists and financiers etc.

    Bombing the civilians is against everything we Americans stand for. It makes us no better then the terrorists we are trying to kill and by doing that we are making matters 10x worse.

  • Michael Hale

    Wasn’t Glenn Becks big beef with Ron Paul his foreign policy of
    non-intervention? Now, Glenn is a non-interventionist? I think he owes
    Dr. Paul an apology…

  • You’reNoGandhi

    Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought the “sarcasm” was a crack at me— my bad.

  • Rob Wolgemuth

    Don, you got caught in the wrong. The more you peddle the quicksand, the deeper you sink.

  • Cory Tyler

    These guys still don’t get it… haha they think we should go into these countries and tell them how to live. That is the reason we are losing the war, its not because we don’t have enough troops morons its because they have a never ending army, its called the entire population of the middle east, they all hate us and why wouldn’t they we are in their country. If they were here we would be pissed so not sure how you can’t understand that. Very selfish that you can’t put yourself in someone elses place..

  • sullijwiii

    Glenn, I am done with you. For you to say we shouldn’t have been in the Middle East you have totally missed the big picture of what the position of the US is in the world. You speak like the left whom I don’t listen too. I don’t like war but in this world because of all the idiots that keep appearing it is necessary. Until Christ returns to rule this world, there will be no peace. Good bye Glenn.

  • http://batman-news.com IT2 IT 2IT 2

    The awesomely sinister directing force of Rockefeler CAP-stone EUGENICS,
    bribes and progamming ————-cannot be UNDER estimated.

    ——————————-HUAC/ NUREMBRG 2014——————————

  • why bother

    This line is especially my favorite: “Our days of being the world’s policemen, our days of interventionists
    is over. If we are directly attacked, so be it. But this must end now.” I am very close to forgiving Glenn for injecting religion into the Tea Party three or four years ago. But I’m just not there yet.

  • joshuasweet

    bring them home place them on the border and seal it tight then use the troops to remove the illegals inside the USA.

  • eddy dees

    This is Beck on his medication, not as entertaining.

  • landofaahs

    I am advocating destroying the enemy that attacks us and promises to attack us just like we did in Dresden Germany, and Tojo’s Japan. Once you attack us you’re done for. That is the best deterrent to war. Once you defeat you enemies completely others will think twice before trying it.

  • Clive

    Not everyone who was against the war in Iraq is a liberal or a progressive. Some of us were not fooled by the blind patriotism and saw Iraq for exactly what it was, a clusterf–k of immense proportions.

  • Clive

    You seem to be under the impression that this “war” is at all winnable. It never was and it never will be.

  • Clive

    You are blinded by your hatred. The vast majority of Muslims ARE peaceful people. However, exactly how peaceful would YOU be if America was invaded and occupied? Would you defend yourself, your home, your nation? Or would you sit in your home terrified?

  • Clive

    So, your answer to the question of indiscriminately killing civilians is “yes”? And you think that doesn’t make you a bigger savage than ISIS?

  • Something Is Wrong

    There is a simple solution to all of this and I’ve been saying it for ages. Repeal the National Guard Act of 1903. You get rid of that one bill and we will have no more wars that nobody wants. Anti-war protests were unheard of before 1903 because there was no way to go to war without the consent of the people if you wanted any hope of actually winning. You want to get the politics out of war? REPEAL THE NATIONAL GUARD ACT OF 1903. If you want me to expand on this, let me know and I’ll be happy to elaborate. This is one of the greatest needs that is least talked about in our nation; it is the solution to so many things it’s ridiculous.

  • Clive

    America has had at least one war for every generation since its inception. Several people die every day in Chicago alone. We don’t seem to be capable of living in peace, either.

  • Anonymous

    Hate to say we told you so, but we did.

  • Anonymous

    ok but if you’ve ever broken a law that makes you an “illegal” too. Start packing.

  • Anonymous

    yeah you keep waiting another 2000 years, and screwing up the world in the meanwhile. good plan.

  • Anonymous

    What that realization should teach you is that you should listen to us next time. We were right all along.

  • Anonymous

    lol. bush destroyed our standing in the world and our ability to defend ourselves, but keep whining about that muslim kenyan.

  • Anonymous

    gee i wonder why it’s a lost cause. couldn’t be a century of US interference, could it?

  • Anonymous

    right….because we were doing so much better when bush was the commander in chief…but do you really think obama makes all the tactical military decisions? keep blaming him, you’ll keep missing the truth.

  • Anonymous

    that’s why you guys supported bush…all part of your master plan to end the world…

  • Anonymous

    Israel is actually the only pluralistic democracy in the region. Don’t throw them under the bus; they deserve our support.

  • Anonymous

    is that why you’ve all been waiting over 2000 years for Him to show up again?

  • Anonymous

    when did US troops ever directly protect israel? We sell them weapons, but there are no US troops there.

  • Anonymous

    the time was 13 years ago, actually.

  • Anonymous

    some victory

  • Anonymous

    “Killing these fools is worth the cost now.”

    When you join the Army, you can tell us what’s worth the cost.

  • Anonymous

    lol. you forgot kenyan.
    go back to taking orders. you’re not paid to think for yourself. and now we all know why.

  • Anonymous

    sending them to fight illegal and unnecessary wars is the only way they are spat upon.

  • Anonymous

    you are a traitor with that disrespect.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    If they are still a little butt hurt over no gay pride nonsense at the Olympics… they need to slap some salve on it… They lost the fággot jihad against the Russian Orthodox church over the the punk rock band and the Olympics, which was something Romney also piled onto stupidly.

    Russia has real soldiers on their border and no gay pride marches in their army… imagine that…

    What man in his right mind would march off to war against the great Russian bear with cúm drunk morons like that in charge?

    They would have men believe the path to Salvation is found by taking sides in the conflict between devils.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    The gaytheists and fagnostics of Al Queerda are insane.

    (judaic bolshevist mammonism) baphomet = mahomet (muslim brotherhood)

    It is the same devil.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    judaic mammonism = baphomet = mahomet = muslim brotherhood

    It is the same devil.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    If I were to tell the press millions of Americans would be blown up by an Iranian nut job or that Democrats have stolen your entire life savings with bailouts and Obamacare, nobody panics because it is all part of the plan.

    But if I say a few homosexuals in Hollywood are upset over their little wee wees, why, everyone just loses their minds!

    Sincerely,

    A. Joker

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    From the greatest American hero…

    “I have killed many Mexicans; I do not know how many, for frequently I did not count them. Some of them were not worth counting. It has been a long time since then, but still I have no love for the Mexicans. With me they were always treacherous and malicious.”

    Geronimo, My Life: The Autobiography of Geronimo, 1905

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    Russia has real soldiers on their border and no gay pride marches with their army.

    Imagine that…

    Who is defending the border of the USA?

    Maybe dual citizen Chuck Schumer can get open borders and gun control for Israel… he is a terrorist just as much as Al Queerda is…

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    Who bombed Orthodox Christian Serbs for the Muslims?

  • http://suzeraining.wordpress.com/ suz

    i used to disagree w/this idea that we could not/should not intervene in iraq for we need a stable mid-east and this is why bush went in whether or not he had the goods. however, we’ve not been able to spread our version of democracy around the globe (nation-building) in an appreciative way and i think that’s the case largely due to progressives poking and prodding, instigating turmoil — that and a few terrorists can and have destroyed anything america has tried to build.

    the most important thing to americans for the future is make america strong and the only way to do that is…TO MAKE INDIVIDUAL AMERICANS STRONG. our leaders aren’t doing it. politicians will NEVER do it. it’s just not gonna happen, so, unfortunately (because it hurts to not be able to help) i agree w/glenn.

  • landofaahs

    You Clive are not very bright. First of all it has nothing to do with hatred of muslims but love of others whom these mad dogs are trying to kill and wipe out. It is a matter of necessity not want. Don’t tell me how peaceful muslims are, I have seen way too much evidence to the contrary and they are only seemingly peaceful if they don’t have the numbers to carry out their villainy. As far as invading and occupying, the muslims are even doing it to themselves. These a holes were causing problem and attacking us in 48 on our own soil. But you probably don’t remember muslim’s attacking Blaire House in an attempt to assassinate Harry S Truman President of the United States. The muslims started the violence at their beginning by forcing everyone to the sword who would not become a muslim circa 700 AD. So stick your idiotic uninformed opinion up your you know what.

  • landofaahs

    It doesn’t matter since the origin of the violence with concerns of the muslims was by the muslims circa 700 AD. Their religion started with the sword to kill anyone who would not convert to their filthy satanic religion. But you are correct that Clinton bombed Christians because they were a threat to muslims. Never mind the fact that the muslims were killing Christians under the old Soviet Union.

  • landofaahs

    I don’t consider muslims innocent. No matter how short they are. If their parents are so worried about them, maybe they should not be murdering people the way they are and then maybe people would not be forced to defend themselves by vanquishing evil foes.

  • landofaahs

    By the way Clive, I assume you hate Obama for his drone strike of your so-called innocent muslim children at weddings too huh?

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    I am the Order of the Dragon, there is nothing you can tell me that I don’t already know about them…

    judaic mammonism = baphomet = mahomet = islam

    It is the same devil.

  • ken.

    it’s their own fault, no matter what america did or didn’t do.

  • ken.

    there is a big difference between a small number of criminals and an entire culture of people who wan’t to kill everyone who is not just like them, including the ones who are almost exactly like them but slightly different.

  • bucketnutz

    Our Military leaders ever allow the troops to fight the wars that they get us into in a way that will result a win. The Politicians are fighting these wars using the blood of our young soldiers.

  • Splinter Cell

    Since GB moved out of Fox, he had been working extremely hard to be fair-and-balanced for the sake of his rating, even telling people he regretted his time at Fox News because he contributed to the division of the country. So all the tears he shed trying to revive a dying Conservative base in 2009-2012 were all but for personal rating, not right from the heart?
    What many Libertarians and Liberals don’t understand, or perhaps ignored, is the fact that everything we enjoy here at home are made possible with US intervention around the world. Since US depends on foreign countries (esp ME) for gas/oil, it is preposterous to assume that a total withdraw of American troops from the ME or around the world would be better for the country. The left is working hard to stop the Keystone pipeline, and block drilling in federal lands, so there’s little to come home to.
    BBC this morning says that the cost of gas around the world has risen 4% since the ISIS attack of oil rich Northern Iraq. The largest oil-refinery in Iraq had already fallen to the ISIS control early this morning. Iran is now moving to Iraq. Iran and Russia are backing Syria. Libyan government remains fragile, Kurds in the North are likely to break away from Iraq, and Britain reopened its embassy in Tehran. Gosh, the world is moving around the ME and yet GB joins Liberals in calling for all US service men and woman to return home. This is scary!

  • Anonymous

    “What many Libertarians and Liberals don’t understand, or perhaps ignored, is the fact that everything we enjoy here at home are made possible with US intervention around the world.”
    The f’ck are you talking about?

    Okay. Lets assume we were having an oil crisis. It was gone, or it will be gone within a year. Lets assume that. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the market right now developing other energy sources and other modes of transportation. Something new would become the market standard. It might be more expensive, but price will drop as added use creates more incentive for efficiency.

  • Anonymous

    “What many Libertarians and Liberals don’t understand, or perhaps ignored, is the fact that everything we enjoy here at home are made possible with US intervention around the world.”
    The heck are you talking about?

    Okay. Lets assume we were having an oil crisis. It was gone, or it will be gone within a year. Lets assume that. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the market right now developing other energy sources and other modes of transportation. Something new would become the market standard. It might be more expensive, but price will drop as added use creates more incentive for efficiency.

  • Anonymous

    You mock knowirsome a God that can reach across 2,000 years+. He said you would do that and is waiting for you to repent but you do not seek Him. You do not observe what He has done so you do not know the other promises He is about to keep. Time is short use it well less you perish in your pride.

  • Anonymous

    Obama loves killing Brown children. What are you talking about?

  • Anonymous

    Last election Veterans donated more campaign funds than to all other candidates COMBINED. Clearly non-intervention is the choice of the Veterans. Why are spitting in their faces by asking them to fight in a war that does not help protect the people they joined to protect?

  • James Shefchik

    Beck called Ron Paul crazy for saying this. A dangerous foreign policy he said. Ron Paul was right – I just pray he wasn’t the last hope to save the country. Beck burned that bridge along will all the rest of the corporate media.

  • Anonymous

    The Bible even teaches that sometimes total annihilation is the answer in a war. In the Old Testament, God ordered Saul and his army to kill all women, children, and animals. The moral of the story was not that Saul didn’t and was blessed for showing “restraint,” but cursed for not destroying them as required. Peace didn’t result, but continued war that stretches to our own time because one city-state was spared collateral damage.

  • Anonymous

    Not going to happen. Glenn Beck is mistaken on this. Our mistake since Vietnam is not showing total brutality to the enemy. Take it to them, their women, and their children. We didn’t win WWII until leveling the cities of Germany, and showing we could wipe Japan off the face of the map.

  • Guest

    Glenn Beck is mistaken on this. Our mistake since Vietnam is not showing total brutality to the enemy. Take it to them, their women, and their children. We didn’t win WWII until leveling the cities of Germany, and showing we could wipe Japan off the face of the map. Collateral damage is not a bug, but a feature of war.

  • Anonymous

    The liberals wanted us out very quickly and back into the hands of the locals. To make matters worse, we DID go after the stronghold of Al Q., but again the same libertarians and liberals screamed to get out of there as well. In order to comply, a decade or more of the required work to rebuild and help was shelved. How long and what resources were needed before Germany and Japan became allies? If you think peace can NEVER be achieved because Muslims are generally low life scum, then fine, say that. Don’t put the onus on failed policies libertarians and liberals made sure failed.

    Liberals and libertarians say George W. Bush signed an agreement to get out by 2011 and then point fingers how right they were. The only reason that George W. Bush had such an agreement was to try and save face in front of liberals and libertarians; and because he is not the Conservative many think he was. He was also, I believe, calling the Democrats’ bluff that they wanted to pull out.

    Never until now have the voices of “peace” had so much influence after war started and with disastrous results. The United States never lost a war in their entire history until Vietnam when “Peaceniks” took over determining strategy through rallies.Glenn Beck is mistaken on this. Our mistake since Vietnam is not showing total brutality to the enemy. Take it to them, their women, and their children. We didn’t win WWII until leveling the cities of Germany, and showing we could wipe Japan off the face of the map. Collateral damage is not a bug, but a feature of war. It is the way you win wars. Destroy the will and capacity of your enemy to fight.

  • Native Pride 1973

    WOW are you really advocating the mass genocide of people simply because they have a different religion then you do? Because that’s what it looks like to me. You sound just like the old white settlers that came to America and committed mass genocide against the indigenous populations because “God gave us this land”. NO one has the right to kill thousands of innocent people for any reason. I’m pretty sure that’s the reason WHY we invaded Iraq AND Afghanistan is because we took a stand AGAINST genocide Also only a extremely small percentage of Muslims are actually terrorists. Most are regular people who just want peace just like everyone else in the world.
    Secondly, I don’t know if you are a Christian or not, but what you are saying is absolutely against everything that is in the Bible. Also, if you think Christians are somehow clean from this sort of action, well you can just look back at history when Protestants and Catholics killed each other in droves over religion.
    Finally, like I stated above, bombing them would only make things worse among both the Muslim world and the rest of the world since we would basically be state sponsored terrorists against Muslims.

  • landofaahs

    DEFENCE. Dumbass

  • Native Pride 1973

    Germany and Japan were actual countries that we were actually at war with. ISIS and AQ aren’t. Bombing and destroying random cities in Iraq will only add to their ranks as people will want revenge for the death of their families. We bomb cities and civilians in Iraq ISIS goes back to Syria and AQ goes back to Afghanistan. Pakistan, Yemen, etc.

  • landofaahs

    It’s also why the democrats voted for the war too.

  • Native Pride 1973

    We actually gave them weapons, we didn’t sell most of them. And we did actually send a good number of troops to Israel for exercises and we also have a very large naval contingent for their protection too. I also people we have a battery of Patriot missiles there too.

  • landofaahs

    It’s their parents fault for jeopardizing them. But if it still bothers you and if you are a democrat, just think of it as abortion and you’ll be fine with it. In WW2 we bombed civilians and that was 2 democrat presidents.

  • Native Pride 1973

    THIS is why we lost Iraq and Afghanistan and no, I’m not a democrat, I just have actual knowledge of what went wrong and what we need to do to win in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Again, WWII doesn’t apply since we aren’t fighting a country, but a GROUP that doesn’t have borders.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Actually, there were a lot of anti-war protests during the Civil War.

  • Mudpie

    Amen about using our OWN oil and gas! Amen, Glenn! What possible morality can there be in killing people to get oil that we will not drill at home??????

    That said, I love our troops, they have been ripped off royally, and they are worth too much to waste in that godforsaken land any longer.

    Btw, some of us conservative/libertarian types saw the writing on the wall as well, way back when. And check out Pat Buchanan’s stuff.

  • Mudpie

    But note you would be killing thousands of innocents with no power to stop the carnage and terrorism. Not that there is not a time and place for total war, but I would submit that this is not likely it.

  • BB

    “Glenn Beck gets it wrong. Liberals and virtually all of the left opposed US aggression against Iraq only because it was a Republican war. They have defended Obama’s wars. What Beck should be saying is, “Ron Paul, you were right about Republican and Democratic wars. Indeed, you are right about a non-interventionist foreign policy.”

    –Lew Rockwell

  • ThorsteinVeblen2012

    I opposed the war from the start. The war was ill defined in terms of it’s objective, it was a ludicrous proposition that we were going to go over there and be greeted with candies and flowers. We would be seen as invaders and they were not going to roll over and let it happen without a fight.

    The representation that the cost would be minimal, both in deaths and in dollars would have been laughable if the implications weren’t so serious.

    We had the most feared, most powerful military in the world until we actually invaded. Saddam was willing to negotiate but George Bush and Richard Pearle responded “See you in Baghdad”

    The blame lies on George Bush and all the people who went along with it, including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry.

  • landofaahs

    If your country allows terrorists to operate in your country then you will suffer with them. It’s too easy for a wink and a nod and say “It’s not us” All these muslims need suffer if they allow that crap. But be a panty waste and let them kill your children and grandchildren if you like but I’m NOT WILLING.

  • Anonymous

    One aspect of this issue hat most people ignore is just how long we as a county have been fighting Muslims.. President Jefferson was the first American president to fight Muslims.

  • Carol Waltman

    I wondered sometimes what would happen if we did not get involved in everyone’s business. Then when the United States stays out of other countries, people say we should do something. I wish they would make up their minds. I wish they would tell us the truth when we are going to war. I wish they would say “we are going to war because we need the oil.” Not in it is in the best interest of America. I don’t like that at all because they never explain why it is in the best interest or they never tell the truth.

  • HerculesLoadmaster

    At least there are no longer any Hussein family rape parties in Iraq. If nothing else was correct about going into Iraq, at least ridding the world of the Sadaam Hussein family was a good thing.

  • Anonymous

    “So basically you are advocating for the mass killing of innocent women and children because they MIGHT one day grow up and become terrorists. WOW. Hopefully I a entirely wrong in that assumption.”

    You’re not. And you’re right to point out that its the same mentality that led to the mass killing of natives as well. Its called extremism. Its an impulse to label others as the enemy, make them less than human and use anger to justify murder. Its really our job as citizens to call out extremism, denounce the dehumanization of fellow people and to call this what it is: a sickness.

  • Anonymous

    you are full of hate, seek help.

  • Anonymous

    Congratulations, Glenn. Finally, someone had the guts, better the integrity, to tell the truth: Yes, we may have been right in toppling Hussein but we made the terrible blunder of occupying Iraq. And yes, not one more of our young killed, bring all of them home NOW! I learned early that “you dont take sides in a fight among mental health inmates”

  • landofaahs

    You’re full of crap. Seek a toilet. I love people. I just don’t believe in abortion which is killing babies and I don’t like muslims killing anyone who does not agree with them. If they leave me alone they will be left alone but they are not willing so they are forcing me and others to protect themselves. The muslim religion is a religion of murder and they don’t want to get along with anyone else and they even admit it but your kind don’t even seem to listen to what they are saying. So go pound sand baby killer.

  • Monet

    Whats next, an open apology to the Dixie Chicks?

  • Kim

    The Bible teaches to put aside our differences and let God judge. The Bible is not meant to be taken literally. If you would like it to be, then everyone who wears clothes made of more than 1 type of material will be stoned to death. As it states in Leviticus. If “God” asked you to sacrifice your own son like a piece of meat would you? Because this is what he asked Abraham to do in the Old Testament. Heard the story of Noah’s Arc? God drowned the world. Now don’t go and criticize me for insulting the Bible or something like that, because I am Catholic and I have read the Bible. Only difference is, I read the Bible and took the lessons it taught about morals and treating others the way you would like to be treated and implicated them into my own life. So before you go and throw the Bible in peoples face to justify your own evils and those you would commit just because of fear, think about all the contradictions the Bible poses between the Books then tell me; Do you want others to use the same justification to harm you and your family even though you may be innocent bystanders?

  • Monet

    Actually, if you study military history, you will find that is exactly what William Tecumseh Sherman, Civil War top general and then US Army Chief of Staff for decades after, said,. The US should never wage war first. If attacked, we should wage war brutally. Burn the enemy’s cities to the ground. Kill everyone. Torture your prisoners and shoot them. Massacre civilians by burning all the food and poisoning the water. Bomb them while they sleep. War is hell. In the end, that is our choice: either do not wage war at all, or wage it with utter viciousness. Why? Because it, paradoxically, actually saves lives by getting the war over as quickly as possible with the end result of a totally vanquished enemy who now has no choice but to rebuild his world from scratch, with us standing over them at gunpoint. He proved it in the American South and against the Indians. Patton, Nimitz and Eisenhower proved it again.

    That was the US military doctrine right up until Truman created this ludicrous idea of a “police action”, undeclared wars waged for some political aim rather than waged for total destruction of the enemy. It gave us Vietnam. It gave us Iraq. Sherman was right, if we were not willing to go into Iraq and slaughter everyone who got in our way, we should have never waged war at all. You see today why he is right. We did not utterly destroy our enemy. We simply stopped fighting them one day. Then we stood around Iraq, waiting to get blown up. Total War is what Sherman called his doctrine. He’s right, it’s all or nothing. Will we ever learn?

  • Kim

    “assuming makes an ass out of you and and an ass out of me.” Great life lesson i learned once upon a time. Hope i can pass it on. Its generally wise to collect facts before making assumptions.

  • Monet

    He needs to apologize to Ron Paul. I heard both him and Pat Gray throw the “Ron Paul is crazy” line around every chance they got back when they were good little Bush-bots. If Beck is going to go this route, he needs to show he means it.

  • Monet

    Man, you are one straight up neo-con. it’s their oil, not ours, for starters. Ron Paul’s whole point was that if you can’t win it through the free market, don’t hand me that justifiication bullshttt when what you really mean is hey, let’s just steal it. It’s not our oil. We should be finding our own energy sources.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Well, we allow drug dealers and cartels and gangs in our country. Maybe Russia or China should bomb us. Apparently we also allow terrorists in our country, we have had a couple of terrorists arrested and attacks in the past few years, maybe we should bomb Las Vegas or Bundy or Dearborn. to get rid of them too.
    Afghanistan DID allow terrorists to operate in their country and the group in charge were called the Taliban and we took out the Taliban and we largely successful. But the average civilian doesn’t like the terrorists there either.
    I watched a documentary of soldiers operating in Afghanistan and they talked with an Afghan who said when people come with guns they have to do what they say since they would be killed if they tried to stop them.

    Also, I didn’t say I don’t want to do anything about it. I want the terrorists killed just as much as you do, however, bombing them will only create more. Sending in SF, CIA and JSOC who are very highly trained who know what they are doing, calling in precision strikes, would be much more successful then annihilating everything in site.

    With that logic and ideology its pretty obvious why Muslims and the rest of the world hate us.

  • Kim

    Did you know the Muslim religion is based off the Old Testament of Bible? same thing Catholicism and Judaism. Or are you too busy fearing what you do not understand to take a step back and look at things objectively?

  • Imnot George

    You are an idiot if you think wars in the 21st Century are anything like WWII much less the Civil War. We can’t “win this fight” because it isn’t our fight. Both the Sunnis (Saudi Arabia, Al Queda and ISIS) and the Shiites (Iraq, Iran, Bashar Al Asad and Hezbollah) use state sponsored terrorism and surrogates to accomplish their aims and undermine their allies (us) while maneuvering for advantage. All great empires (Macedonian, Roman, British, etc..) basically brutally occupied the territory they conquered. There is no way we can do that in this century because all it takes is an insurgency with some AK-47s and rocket propelled grenades to disrupt any economic progress during an occupation and cost the occupier far more economically than they will ever extract. We can’t identify the enemy either because both Sunni and Shia will be against us and you can’t tell the difference (because there isn’t any other than ideas) between the two. The only successful course is to go full steam ahead in becoming completely energy self-sufficient (and green) and then offering support and that technology to any peaceful democratic countries who want to be our friends. That way we won’t have to be in the Middle East for oil and energy and don’t have to be there at all unless there are other benefits and strategic values and imperatives that say we should.

  • Native Pride 1973

    You may or may not be right that total war is the only way to engage, however, your adding of the Indians isn’t the same thing. Committing mass genocide of a entire race of people for no other reason than that fact that they we were here first is completely immoral and not war.

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, great idea, threaten the Muslim terrorists with total nuclear annihilation – BTW, how do you tell peaceful Muslims (and children) from terrorists? Do we have a new nuclear weapon that leaves peaceful Muslims and property (jihadi neutron bomb maybe?) when it explodes and only kills the terrorists or are you proposing that we just annihilate over a Billion Muslims and just chalk up the dead peaceful ones to “collateral damage”? Did you think that opinion of yours through AT ALL?

  • Imnot George

    +1 – HarryC seems to think that genocide is the answer. Jeesh.

  • Imnot George

    Quick, time for an exorcism!

  • Native Pride 1973

    YAY! There is hope for America! I almost wrote something very similar to this, so thanks for doing it first lol.

  • Anonymous

    Lew Rockwell’s the best.

  • Imnot George

    When the “greatest military in the world” loses far more wars than it wins since WWII other than fearsome foes like Granada, perhaps there is something wrong with the leaders who get us into unwinnable wars for unfathomable motives. BTW, the “right way to win a war” is to avoid it altogether if at all possible when achieving your goals at the same time.

  • Imnot George

    Time for an exorcism I tell you!

  • Imnot George

    Quick, time for an exorcism I tell you!

  • Native Pride 1973

    You know you won the argument when the opponent resorts to name calling. And your wrong their religion isn’t one of hate, but people distort it, as people do with the Bible to be used as hate. I mean, Christianity was an extremely violent religion for a large part of its history, the Catholic/Protestant wars were massive and people used God as an excuse to commit genocide against an entire race of people.

  • Imnot George

    For oil, profit and power, what else? We send the kids of the poorest and middle class to fight and die overseas pacifying other countries so big business can make huge profits. A great American hero (far greater than Geronimo), Major General Smedley Butler, saw that 80 years ago and wrote a book, “War is a Racket”, about it – http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, great, set the Middle East up for a nuclear war. Great Idea!

  • Imnot George

    They pretty much never needed them, just money and arms in supply to keep their army going in battle when it comes.

  • Imnot George

    Technically, we gave them money to buy weapons from our defense companies. More corporate welfare.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Pretty sure God didn’t order anybody to commit mass killing of civilians anytime after the New Testament. There is a clear divide between the 2, the old was for the Jews, the new is for everybody. There is absolutely NO correlation between Saul and Obama in the 21st century.

  • Imnot George

    Sure they do, but that isn’t going to keep Russia (Putin) and China out of the Middle East if we completely withdraw and leave a complete vacuum.

  • Imnot George

    Yes, but Mohammed and his followers were responding to violence against them (pretty much everybody was violent against others for whatever reason if they weren’t subjugated and often even if they were) but the Muslims were just a whole lot more successful at waging war. If they hadn’t been, someone else would have been instead.

  • Imnot George

    Yeah and you are a genius calling about a Billion people all “mad dogs” and lumping them all together. Real Christian of you. BTW, Christians have always been real peaceful and loving too, right? How about those peaceful and loving Crusades and Inquisitions?

  • Imnot George

    No doofus, Jefferson negotiated with Muslims (the Barbary states) for President Adams because they were capturing American (and other) merchant ships for money and power. It had little to do with religion. “The U.S. Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson, decided to send envoys to Morocco and Algeria to try to purchase treaties and the freedoms of the captured sailors held by Algeria.[6] Morocco was the first Barbary Coast state to sign a treaty with the U.S. on 23 June 1786. This treaty formally ended all Moroccan piracy against American shipping interests. Specifically, Article 6 of the treaty states that if any Americans captured by Moroccans or other Barbary Coast states docked at a Moroccan city, they would be set free and come under the protection of the Moroccan state.”

  • Imnot George

    Exactly, we are fighting an enemy that cannot surrender and it cannot be determined if they are all eliminated even if we wanted to and tried. That pretty much makes it interminable, unending and un-winnable.

  • Imnot George

    We didn’t destroy that enemy until they actually attacked us. What you are talking about is pre-emptive war (Bush’s term) where we attack anyone that we think might attack us. Great!

  • Defend Liberty Philly Dude

    Evidence of cultural evolution is visible in related alphabets, such as those of the Greeks and Russians, who trace their roots to the same language ancestor as Hindi, Urdu, and Sanskrit.

  • Imnot George

    All religions are “religions of murder” at some or most points, especially against anyone who does not join and believe (and often against those who get no chance to do so – other times against believers for one reason or another).

    The Christian Church started killing unbelievers as early as the 4th century. The killing (often with torture) of heretics, church splinter groups, dissenters, atheists, agnostics, deists, pagans, infidels and unbelievers was supported by almost all mainstream Christian theology for over a thousand years, starting with the intolerant St. Augustine (died 430 AD).

    Probably much (but not all) of Christianity’s killing is in the past. Christianity had a long run as the world’s most violent religion. But it is probably safe to say that it is no longer the world’s most violent religion, but Christians have little room to criticism other religions (like Germans have no credibility criticizing others for not stopping genocide) until they do a great deal more to stop ALL religious killing.

  • Imnot George

    Most of us are definitely “trying” and we want to govern and try different ways (conservative, progressive, etc…) to get to the goals that most if not all of us tend to agree on (prosperity, work, equality, fairness, good education, freedom, peace, stability, diversity in thought, belief and just plain people are a few I think). After all it is the goal for the American people (all the American people), not the way you achieve it that really counts.

    I am constantly trying to figure out Conservatives and Republicans because most of them seem to be against pretty much everything they were for before 10 or 20 years ago. It is a crazy party with several factions (establishment/business, religious right/social conservatives, libertarian, neo-cons and now the Tea Party) that only really agree on one or two things between them. This seems to be creating a great deal of chaos with almost no one really representing true “conservative” values and most really supporting very “reactionary” values and ideals. Though not a Republican myself (much more progressive with some strong libertarian values) I always honored and respected the Republican tradition set by Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower and even Nixon in some areas (all of whom would be drummed out of the Republican Party as RINOs today if they stood up for what they said they believed in during their day) so it makes me sad that this is not any form of Republican party or loyal opposition that I can recognize.

    Sometimes I cannot help but really believe that today’s Republicans would happily outlaw the Democratic party or at least make it illegal for Democrats to vote if they possibly could find a legal way to do it. The Republican infatuation with corporations are people and money as speech seems to me to be a real hate of democracy and freedom of speech and a love of monarchy and their own version of political correctness. In fact it really reminds me a lot of the approach of the Communist Parties of both China and the U.S.S.R. That just makes me sad and likely is making Lincoln, Roosevelt and Eisenhower spin in their graves.

  • Imnot George

    Obama’s Wars? You mean Libya? Or do you mean Obama’s prosecution of Bush’s wars? Libya, where there were no boots on the ground and the Libyans got rid of a terrible dictator with the help of NATO nations and us? Seems a much better model for “war” than Iraq and Afghanistan to me. Oh, then there was Syria where drawing the red line got Russia and Iran to work with Assad to try to get rid of the chemical weapons. Again, better model for resolving international conflicts and really making war, especially a war that we were not likely to win or get out of any time soon, the last resort.

  • Imnot George

    Libertarian does not equal liberty or freedom. Just because Beck gets it right once in a while usually only for a little while, does not mean there is hope for him.

  • Imnot George

    Yep, spot on, my view was that getting rid of Saddam might (only might) be good for the world because he was a really bad guy, but I predicted it would be terrible for the USA unless we went in with a real coalition like we did in the first Gulf War. I also viewed it as really stupid and counterproductive because it would mean that Afghanistan would go on the back burner and probably turn into a debacle which raised other concerns because the Taliban could come back and Afghanistan is strategically placed between Iran and nuclear Pakistan.

  • Imnot George

    Even a broken clock is right twice a day. RP nor his nutty son are the last hope to save the country. The American people are the last hope to save the country if it even really needs “saving” which I would dispute.

  • Imnot George

    The Canadians, the Mexicans and the Atlantic and Pacfic oceans (that would be the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard). Any more questions?

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, ’cause we are sooooo peaceful and Mexico and Canada are just itching to invade us. You are completely delusional.

  • Imnot George

    Uh, like we did with Native Americans and blacks?

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, because meddling over almost a full century by the most powerful nations on earth (Britain, France and the USA) couldn’t cause any problems in a developing region. Just look at the perfect and wonderful place African is (probably all their own fault too) now.

  • Imnot George

    Monarchy and Christianity were our government and we managed a pretty good run with democracy until plutocracy took over. I think the Muslims in the Middle East have a shot if we get the hell out for a while. Tell me, what would be the third sect in your proposed “three sectarian states”? You know not of what you speak.

    ISIS will not take over Iraq. They won’t dare go up against the Kurds and if they do, they will be completely destroyed. Iran will not let them into the Shiite areas of Iraq. In fact, if they don’t behave substantially better than Al Queda did, the Sunni tribes will soon deal with them as well. You know nothing about this area of the world.

  • Imnot George

    And Iraq was involved in “We got it whether we want it or not” how? Afghanistan, yes, Iraq, no. Go back to taking orders and jumping out of planes (if indeed you ever really did that) because strategy is not your forte.

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, and that was worth 4000 dead and 32,000 injured….not. You got it about right when you wrote, “If nothing else was correct about going into Iraq”. Ridding Sadaam was only maybe good for the world, but it was definitely bad for the USA.

  • Imnot George

    I wish they would say, “we are going to war to stop genocide” and otherwise we would support friendly democratic governments with trade, technology and development funds and embargo other governments.

  • David DeChant

    The Media is Mightier Than War ©

    I am a Marine Vietnam Veteran and strongly believe Major General Smedley Butler’s (USMC, recipient of two Medals of Honor) declaration that “War is a Racket”.

    Therefore, We The People must strategically organize nation-wide and participate fully and equally in the foreign policy debates creating modesty, realism, transparency and accountability, keeping in mind that Warmongers are the existential threat to humanity. “Enough is enough!”

    When it comes to protecting and supporting our troops, veterans and their families, herein lies the moral essence of U.S. citizen obligation. Therefore, one of the greatest challenges is going beyond the villains, grossly incompetent national
    security officials and lapdog media pundits, victims and heroes of the 9/11
    Attack (and subsequent vile debacle in Iraq, and untenable strategy in
    Afghanistan) to intensive, comprehensive, public debates about the critical
    issues of our national and economic security, human rights, sustainable defense
    and foreign policy objectives — who pays and sacrifices, and how best to counterattack terrorism and eliminate its underlying roots and hateful true believers here and abroad.

    We must deeply understand the very complex nature of genuine fears, threats, and the required measured responses, which will either affirm or eliminate the obsolete components, assumptions and foundations of post-World War II U.S. Foreign Policy, and their most devastating economic impacts here and abroad.

    This task will take incredible moral courage as intense and sustained as our Warriors serving in harms’ way purportedly protecting our Nation and way of life.

    As citizens of a democracy, we must, repeat, must demand and integrate the facts
    (intelligence and public knowledge) to fully comprehend the enormous challenges
    before us. We must rethink our political and diplomatic relations, passionately
    reflecting on and changing our values and allegiances that have had and continue to have brutal effects on our fellow humans.

    We must strongly influence our foreign policy debates and decisions that have a profound impact on hundreds of millions of men, women, and children; and hold ourselves and elected and/or appointed decision-makers accountable.

    We The People are the Best and Brightest and are ultimately responsible for their decisions. We must instruct our government employees about the great truths for solving our most dangerous problems. This dynamic struggle is about our core beliefs and ideas of our diminished democracy, its vision and the underlying democratic principles and values inherent in our Constitution, Declaration of Independence and most international treaties that inspire us to take preemptive actions to protect our world… when we choose.

    We must choose to be a progressive world leader, with our military being recast into
    its essentially supporting defensive role as a complement and backup for the
    other vital components of our national security strategies and public diplomacy. We must authenticate clear and present dangers, international perceptions, ground truths and intelligence, and the political and economic assumptions of proposed policies and actions; and implement threat reduction using all of these components, as necessary.

    Our choice to redress the grievances of previous and current devastating folly policy (Vietnam War, support for Saddam Hussein under Reagan and Bush Senior, and numerous repressive regimes…etc.), and to reestablish our prestige and exert legitimate power insuring progress toward greater international stability, understanding, tolerance, prosperity and abundance will be the dynamic organizing principles to develop, fund and enhance systems, measures, programs and institutions that will prevent economic crisis and WAR.

    Perhaps President Dwight David Eisenhower provides a guiding principle: “No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice… No nation’s security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow-nations… Every nation’s right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable… Any nation’s attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible… A nation’s hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations. In the light of these principles the citizens of the United States defined the way they proposed to follow, through the aftermath of war, toward true peace.”

    Semper Fidelis

  • Imnot George

    Democracy “doesn’t work in those countries” because democracy never worked from the top down, especially with no institutional experience of democracy and no institutions (except perhaps the secret police and the army). Democracy in America, England and practically every other successful democracy started at the grass roots level in an established country with democratic traditions and institutions. It isn’t the people, it is the society.

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, and they have all been saying that “time is short” for 2000 years as well, probably 3000 or more. Hasn’t worked out all that well has it? Guess your “God” has his own time table that he/she isn’t cluing you in to. LOL

  • Imnot George

    Yeah, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day.

  • Imnot George

    You been smokin’ that medical MJ again? Iraq is NOT Germany or Japan. Period. Liberals never wanted us to go into Iraq (but some went along with the Authorization for Force based on misrepresentations and lies) but instead to finish Afghanistan as quickly as possible and ideally with a successful and stable government. Looks like we punted that one as well.

  • Anonymous

    How do you feel about all the children killed by the Obama administrations very liberal(not in the political sense but in the literal sense) use of drones? How do you feel about Obama trying to extend the Iraq war? How do you feel the Obama administration has handled Afghanistan? How did you feel about the administration’s push to go to war with Syria? Don’t try to make Obama out to be this great world leader and voice for freedom when he’s not.

  • Imnot George

    You don’t know what you are talking about. Most war over 4700 years since the first recorded war has been waged for political and economic reasons and was almost always limited. Very rarely was war waged for total destruction. Also, your example of war against the Indians is completely flawed. Also, Iraq is not Germany, Japan the American South. Pretty much only modern weapons allow for completely destruction and along with that comes international law and the Geneva Conventions. The only part you got right was if you can’t win and don’t have a plan for the peace, you should not fight the war.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    The Catholic clergy has a “spread the other cheek” policy for altar boys…

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    judaic mammonism = baphomet = mahomet = muslim brotherhood

    It is the same devil.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    The Catholic clergy has a “spread the other cheek” policy for altar boys…

    Hurry, you’ll be late for mass.

  • Anonymous

    No. Just No.

    In guerilla war fare, the enemy is mixed in with the people you’re trying to save. If you just wipe out everybody, guess what. You still lose.

  • eric

    Ummm, more than the liberals, the libertarians were right.

    I still think Glenn Beck is a manipulative sociopath, but hey, at least someone influential has the right message.

  • eric

    By your logic, you should hate white people. Look at all the white people who carried out Stalin and Hitler’s plans. Okay, white isn’t a choice, lets try something else.

    Christians. They’ve had a good run recently, but you know about the crusades, the Spanish inquisition, and those murderous Puritans. Clearly they’re all dangerous.

    Dont be dumb.

  • eric

    That thing about killing any nonbelievers isn’t true. The Qur’an actually says that Jews and Christians should be respected as men of the book. Just that they should be cautioned not to turn Jesus into polytheism.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Yep, pretty much. The War on Terror didn’t really start in 2001, America has faced dozens of terrorist attacks in the decades leading up to 9/11 and it won’t end once we leave Afghanistan or even if we leave the entire Middle East. The Middle East is entirely unstable, especially now with the Arab Spring toppling so-called “stable” regimes. AQ, ISIS, etc will find a foothold somewhere. America either has to buckle down to the task at hand and do the job right, or just give up and pull out completely. Both options are completely viable and have their merits, but America should come to terms with terror being common around the world and even from non-Muslim sources. aka the Balkans, Africa, Asia, and everywhere people hate America and our allies.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Yeah, America is one of the only countries in the world that barely profits from arms dealing, except for major weapon sales such as tanks, missiles, etc.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Except if its a 24 hour clock….

  • Native Pride 1973

    Yeah, if we really just wanted Saddam gone would could have just sent a bomber over or a hit squad, except that that’s illegal since we aren’t allowed to do targeted assassinations against other heads of state, but I’m sure we could have made an exception.

  • Clive

    Bright enough to see through the manure spread by people like you.

    Don’t try to tell me that all Muslims are evil when I’ve lived around them for over 20 years and have yet to see any serious crime come from them.

    If you want to talk about “idiotic uninformed opinions” while bringing up ancient history, you should look up the First Crusade. Christian knights were knee deep in the blood of Muslim men, women, and children, at the base of Golgotha Hill, in front of a mosque. In return, the Muslims let all of the Christian women, children, and non-combatants go when they retook Jerusalem. But, you’re a history professor, so…

  • Native Pride 1973

    Very true. Obama hasn’t gone into war except Libya but we really weren’t that involved for that long, mostly in a support role. And your technically right, we didn’t have “boots on the ground” but we did have CIA SAD on the ground to coordinate air strikes and to help direct Haftar back into Libya to lead the Libyans, apparently he has been “our guy” since the 70′s.

  • Native Pride 1973

    View on Drones? Very smart, save US lives and has no risk of losing anybody from the air. Plus, the Paks and Yemen supported the drone strikes until the Republicans went public with it and showed what was going on and so the got mad. Also, Bush made good use of the drone strikes while he was in office, especially towards the end. Also, there really hasn’t been that many civilian causalities caused by drones as some in the media might lead you to believe.

    Obama end the war in Iraq as soon as it was feasible if you look at the facts.

    He has handled Afghanistan very nicely so far in my view. He attempted the surge, which could only be successful to a point, but also supported the “one tribe at a time” strategy which has been very successful in Pashtun areas. Plus, he has a good pull out strategy that allows flexibility going forward into the future.

    Syria? Yes, I don’t think we should need to go to war in Syria, but at least he asked Congress and followed the Constitution in that part.

    Obama may not be the best world leader ever, but he is a far site better than Bush was for sure.

    (I know this wasn’t intended for me but thought I might jump in lol)

  • Anonymous

    It’s time for us to fight the terrorists running wild on our own streets in government uniforms!
    Serve your country as a keyboard warrior and help us fight the war of ideas!
    A sample of songs FREE DOWNLOAD share them AND SPREAD THE MESSAGE OF FREEDOM!
    https://soundcloud.com/user262008952/i-believe-in-the-constitution-5
    https://soundcloud.com/user262008952/lifes-been-good-to-me-so-far_3
    https://soundcloud.com/user262008952/federal-agent-man-7
    https://soundcloud.com/user262008952/bye-bye-ameican-pie-remix

  • landofaahs

    I would leave them alone if they would do also. I am just treating them how they would treat others and thereby how they would want to be treated.. By the way, whatever group you belong to has a history of hate too. If you are an atheist you have Stalin Mao and Hitler as your role models. The crusades were in response to the evil muslim hordes who wanted to rule the world dumbass.

  • landofaahs

    They were also males. So you say all males are guilty. They are all European so Europeans are all guilty also. That’s fine, it justifies destroying islam.

  • landofaahs

    Islam is evil and therefore anyone who espouses evil is evil.

  • landofaahs

    Semper Fi?

  • landofaahs

    No they were not. Islam was started from the filthy Koran which tells them to kill all non-muslims.

  • landofaahs

    China and Russia don’t like the muslims either. They will just use them and like the Chechens, they will turn on them and use terrorism. The muslims have been knifing many Chinese lately.

  • landofaahs

    God has given me my family to protect. It’s my job to do so and will do so to the best of my ability. If you don’t care enough for your family that’s your business. Frankly if I were president I would destroy a whole nation rather than lose one American citizen because that’s the job of a president, to protect and defend the United States and it’s citizens, not protect the world. If you want to protect the world then run for head of the UN..

  • landofaahs

    The Taliban took over the country. So we were justified. Although I would have kept raining fire from the skies until they handed Bin Laden over to us. But it all could have been avoided if Clinton had just taken Bin Laden when Sudan offered him to us.

  • landofaahs

    First of all those terrorists are not harming China and Russia as far as I can see. Could you show me how they are being harmed? But you are correct that we should be eliminating these punk drug cartels and seal our border to keep them from their evil works.
    If you bomb them all, how does that create more of them? Not logical. But if more come then we take them out too. If you give up, then you surrender or die. We must fight them because they are not going to just ignore us if we leave them alone. That is just Naïve.

  • landofaahs

    I know but sometimes I just want to make sure they know they are idiots. We do them no favors by allowing them to think otherwise. It needs constant reinforcement.

  • landofaahs

    The muslims put Christians to the sword first and did so in the middle east where Christianity was quite common. So you filled with typical BS

  • landofaahs

    First of all, Jesus is God along with the Father and the Holy Spirit. It is one God not 3 but three persons in one God head. So what does the Qur’an say should happen to Christians who believe that Jesus was not only a prophet but God?

  • Something Is Wrong

    There were a lot of people who didn’t want to go to war because it was against their own countrymen and often against their own family members but I have yet to find any solid reference to an actual anti-war protest during the Civil War. Do you have an example that you could cite? The point is that with the Militia system we had when we were founded, the President was not the Commander-in-Chief over all of the nation’s military force but only over the regular standing military which was small. The reason there weren’t really anti-war protests was because if the local militia wasn’t convinced that the war was worth fighting, then they didn’t go. Period. If one of these militia units walked up to a battlefield and the General in charge had a battleplan that they felt wasn’t right or was not worth them laying down their lives for, they were free as a unit to leave with no repercussions. The regular army couldn’t do this, but the militias could and with the militia system there was no possible way that the nation could go to war with any hopes of success without the support of the states and their local militias. The whole system itself was a check against the President having too much power; a check that Teddy Roosevelt was desperate to erase. There was no point to protests because the people had a great deal of control over whether or not they went to war. There may have been pressure from society, but not any compulsion from politicians and that, my friend, is exactly the point. Our militia system was different from the military structure of any other major nation in the world at that point in time and it was intentionally put in place by the founders. It was not just what they used because it was all that they knew. I put in 8 years in the military and one of the biggest lies that everyone just accepts is that the way things are now is just how it has to be and how it has always been.

  • Nicelady

    Hi Mr. Beck, I just want to thank you for having the humility to admit you were wrong on this, because we liberals get things wrong, too. I’m a Christian also and I have the humility to admit I was wrong on many issues and I’m glad you are extending an olive branch. I want the healing of the country too and I hope we can have a friendly conversation about our differences about politics as I believe you are right that most people just want to have a happy, peaceful life, all over the world

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    Ordo Draconis… sine pari…

  • ken.

    i never said anything about mexico or canada in this post so you are the one who is delusional. and in case you haven’t noticed mexico and the rest of central and south america has been invading us for decades.

  • ken.

    back in those times all cultures were the same and committed acts that were not right, it was the way of the world then, not just america. by the way we are not living in or talking about those times, we are living in and talking about the world today. try to keep up, you are way behind the times.

  • ken.

    Britain has always been and still is an occupying power in many countries, they are still in Ireland, and Scotland and only recently pulled out of south africa. they caused most of the problems in the middle east, africa, ireland, scotland, etc,.. america went against our principles and tried to fix those problems and became the worlds police, this was completely against the founding principles of our country and has done much damage to us. thats why we must return to the founders original intent and constitutional values. our founding fathers were non-interventionists and did not want us to become involved in others wars, only when we were attacked were we supposed to go to war with foreign lands. this is not the same as isolationist as many uneducated people seem to believe.

  • David OConnor

    We’ve spent nearly a decade training and equipping the Iraqi military only for them to immediately lay down arms at the approach of a terrorist organization. I have one thing to say regarding the Iraqi people on this matter: If they will not fight to protect themselves and a government which will try to represent all of them, **** em.

    They don’t want this democracy. They don’t want a government which does not lash out against it’s own people with military force. They don’t want a leader who didn’t kill his way up to the post. Perhaps the worst thing we could have done was go in with a large military force and try to make it happen.

    We’re under mountainous amounts of debt, which is becoming a national security issue affecting our ability to wage war because it has to be done on borrowed money.

    We’re still buying their oil which is a national security issue because it’s funding terrorists.

    And we haven’t secured our borders properly against illegal immigration which is not only a national security issue but also fueling this Amnesty debate.

    These are things that as a Liberal I’d like to see getting worked on.

    Let’s develop electric vehicles and alternative energy sources so we can tell the whole middle eastern region to pound all the oil filled sand they can dig up right up their ***es.

    Let’s actually secure our borders and ports ensuring terrorists can not enter, be funded, or receive supplies illicitly.

    Let’s balance our budget, buy back our debt from China, and insert some form of sense into our policy making.

    And no, not one more soldier, dollar, bullet or plane should be wasted on Iraq which is laying down arms for their new overlords or Afghanistan which has always doubled over into the fetal position when the Taliban showed up. Screw em.

  • Anonymous

    And what was going on is that children were being killed at alarming rates and drones weren’t even slightly accurate.

    “Obama end the war in Iraq as soon as it was feasible if you look at the facts.”
    Are you serious?

    “Syria? Yes, I don’t think we should need to go to war in Syria, but at least he asked Congress and followed the Constitution in that part.”
    And support which side? Al Nusra(terrorists) or the government(dictators)?

    “Obama may not be the best world leader ever”
    Best world leader ever is almost an oxymororn.

  • Monet

    Well, we would actually agree on that, but I was actually using it as an example of Sherman’s theory on waging war. He inflicted mass starvation on them by killing the buffalo. His troops attacked defenseless villages instead of warriors. In the end, the Indians were utterly defeated. Immoral, yes, effective war, yes.

  • Monet

    Our first mistake was letting ourselves be used by the Neo-cons, who had a dream of world control. They were really a pack of idiots. Iraq is not a country. Invading the place was a fool’s errand. It was created by the British out of three groups who have had a thousand year history of fighting amongst themselves. The only way it could be governed is by guys like Saddam, who was not, incidently, an Islamist, he was an old fashioned Stalinist, and in hindsight, we were better off with him in there. The British did this to prevent the re-formation of the actual nation that has existed there in the past, the Arabian Empire, which once extended from the borders of Iran all the way into southern Spain.

    It’s capital was Baghdad. The British wanted to split off Baghdad from Saudi Arabia and Syria so their historic capital was cast adrift into a land of perpetual warfare, so they created this fictitious country called “Iraq”. For a long time, both us and the British wanted guys like Saddam running the place so we could get the oil. Saddam went off the reservation with his own dreams of a Socialist Arab Empire, and now, he was an enemy of the oil companies, and had to go. The real truth is no one ever gave a shttt when he was gassing or torturing his own people, and the entire story of WMDs and Saddam’s connection to 9-11, well, they were all a made-up pack of lies to sucker us into letting Bush do the hit on Saddam for the oil companies, and for his own personal vendetta with Saddam. Everything we were given as reasons for invading Iraq, was a lie. They used 9-11 as an excuse, the worst tragedy in our history, was used to do something that had nothing at all to do with it.

    We were deluded into to thinking that these people actually thought of themselves as “Iraqis”. They don’t. They think of themselves as Arabs. They think of themselves as Kurds. They think of themselves as Shiites. We stepped into a huge turd pile. Bush then pushed this pile of horse shttt saying we could establish a democracy amongst these people, who have been slaughtering each other for a thousand years. It was all a crock.

    A democracy requires a people who have something that unifies them, a shared history, and a common language, and a populace who believes in the rule of law over the rule of men. Iraq has none of that. That is why their troops ran. It’s not their country. Notice that the Kurds don’t run. That’s because they have a de facto country, Kurdistan. They won’t defend Baghdad, but they will die for Kurdistan. Same with the Shiites, they will die for Basra, the historic province of Arab Shiites that was part of Iran for a thousand years. And the Sunnis? They are dying for the reformation of their lost country: The Arab Empire. The Caliphate. We need to just let them break up into their natural parts, and get used to the idea that the Arab Empire is about to be re-born, and that we will be in a new Cold War. We need to begin accepting the idea that thanks to the Bush-Cheney con job, our boys died for nothing. Nothing. It’s sinking in with me, thanks to Glenn.

  • Monet

    Out quickly? We were there for ten years.

  • Native Pride 1973

    And ISIS isn’t harming us either. And, using your logic, we should probably bomb the hell out of El Paso, and other border towns. Its their own fault for harboring drug cartels.

    And there is absolutely NO way of eliminating every single person who wants to do harm unless you literally nuke all of the middle east, and probably Russia and China while were at it, I mean come on its not that hard to understand. Just watch Red Dawn, that is exactly what the Iraqi people look at us like, conquerors. And in the movie, they clearly fought like terrorists. Also, like I said before, we are fighting a a group that has no borders so basically he have to bomb and attack literally every country in the world to eliminate terrorist locations, even places in the United States, if we were to use your logic.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Sudan didn’t “offer” him to us. They didn’t have the ability to actually take him down. Plus, we were trying to get him all the way back during the time he was in Sudan and failed in several attempts to eliminate him and track him down.

    Also, we beat the Taliban with have to bomb everything in sight so we didn’t have to continue bombing them after they were already defeated and we did almost get him at Tora Bora but thanks to the political machine in Washington, we couldn’t move fast enough to get him. Also, the Taliban wouldn’t have cared if we bombed the hell out of their cities, they were basically doing the same thing to their own people anyways. Most Afghans hate the Taliban, too.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Also, Iraq was the perfect counter to Iran and to keep them in check from becoming overwhelmingly powerful in the region, like they are today. We also were Saddam’s ally for a long time too but we decided to leave a vacuum in his place instead. Honestly, I feel that we should give the Kurds their own country and become their ally, they are a lot more more American than anyone else in that region, barring Israel of course.

  • landofaahs

    You assume I give a crap about your opinion.

  • landofaahs

    They have sworn our destruction and it is a direct threat. I don’t believe in waiting for them to complete their evil before ZI act. Would you just sit by and wait if someone threatened to kill your children? If so I am glad you were never my parent.

  • landofaahs

    Yes they did.

  • landofaahs

    Just think of it as Obama calling a drone strike on a wedding party killing innocent women and children in order to get one terrorist attendee. When you comprehend that, just put it on a larger scale you moron.

  • landofaahs

    Only if it is just name calling. But if you make points that idiots like you cannot refute and ignore, then I have and did win the argument and the conversation is over because I have other idiots to vanquish. Bye bye.

  • Native Pride 1973

    I never said lets not do anything about it, you should reread my post about how to defeat the terrorist threat. We don’t defeat it by bombing them, since that is completely unfeasible to completely defeat them that way. I advocated above that we send in highly trained SF teams along with SEALs, Rangers, JSOC, CCT, TACP, etc to lead the indigenous forces to victory and to train and build up their military (SF role) and beat back the terrorists in LIMITED precision air strikes (CCT and TACP role) and to eliminate the high level targets with quick strikes to weaken the power of the main terrorist groups and to kill the financiers (JSOC, SEAL, Ranger role) and to control key military locations with more of a direct threat by a more sustained approach (Ranger, SEAL and limited conventional role). This “plan” if you will, isn’t focused to only Iraq but the Middle East, Europe (specifically Balkans), Africa, Asia, etc. This strategy worked very well in Afghanistan and in parts of Africa as well but has not been fully embraced to its potential. In fact, it really hasn’t been employed at all except in small scale. It requires support from governments in high level threat areas (middle east, Africa) and a really strong intelligence gather organization (CIA, ISA role). It also would require the help from other willing allies, like Israel’s special operations and intelligence forces and the British and French, both of which have been our only real allies the the War on Terror.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Source, please?

  • Native Pride 1973

    Actually, its you who haven’t actaully responded directly to what I have been saying. I do agree that some of your points are very valid. ISIS and Muslim extremism is a threat to the United States and we should act preemptively. However, you take it a step to far for me to able to go, I oppose genocide and the purposeful killing of civilians and innocent people everywhere, as should most people, and especially if we are the perpetrators. I do agree that it can be used successfully and has its merits, like WWII, Korea (to a point), however, it cannot work in this situation since we aren’t fighting a war against a country with borders, but an ideology that twists its own religion to commit acts of extreme terror and brutality. However, to say ALL Muslims are evil is blind and false.

  • landofaahs

    Your source please.

  • landofaahs

    Afghanistan will fall soon. The reason we were able to totally defeat Germany and Japan is because we targeted the population also. When enough of the population has been psychologically defeated, they will force their leaders to surrender. As long as the populace thinks they are immune from the decisions and actions of those leaders, they will give tacit support to the same. Only when the large part of the population has bigger fear of the enemy over the fear of their leaders do things change. It’s called bottom up defeat. There is always someone who is willing to take leadership when another top dog falls. Watch and see. So that is all I can say to you and otherwise you just want to argue the same points which I disagree with and we will not change each other so just have your way because I don’t have the power to prove you wrong because I am not the president.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Well the Baltimore riots for one and there were riots in New York against the draft.

    Secondly, the use of militia was the main reason why we lost the War of 1812 and had capital destroyed. Militias didn’t have the strength, will, or training to stand up in a pitched battle. Actually, even during the Revolution, they were the main reason why we lost almost every battle we engaged in. Also, militias were all but non-existent by the Civil War and were completely gone by the 1870′s. The National Guard Act was just formal more or less.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94rcOVJBMYQ Winston Blake

    The borders are wide open, you cúm drunk idiot…

  • Native Pride 1973

    Actually, we only beat Germany after taking Berlin and the death of Hitler. And, like I have stated in other posts, total war only works when fighting actual countries and I don’t think Afghanistan will go.

    But your right we can agree to disagree.

  • Clive

    And that somehow excuses literally standing knee deep in the blood of women and children as a Christian thing to do? LOL!

  • Clive

    If Islam is evil, so is Christianity. If Muslims are evil, so are Christians. I take it that you’re a typical Sunday Christian and haven’t actually read the Old Testament, let alone the Qur’an.

  • Clive

    Simpletons can only see the most basic aspects of things like this. It’s why our nation is ultimately doomed. We won’t be conquered by an outside force. We will, as our Founding Fathers predicted, be conquered by the stupidity of the average American.

  • Clive

    I have a family to protect, as well. Beyond the nonsensical rhetoric, I actually HAVE defended my family and home from violence. That doesn’t mean I’m going to kill the neighbor’s kids.

    You offer nothing more than rationalizations for genocide. You are literally no better than a Nazi.

  • landofaahs

    Sandy Berger (Burglar) told the Washington post Oct 03 1996 I believe. He said that the FBI did not think we had enough evidence to bring him to the U.S. Now why would he say that if there was not a legitimate offer made by Sudan? No, there was a legitimate offer and his statements prove it.

  • landofaahs

    Since you seem to be an honest person in that you are seeking truth. Perhaps you can chew on this. Anytime a president or country gets the idea that one soldier can be sacrificed in order to save members of a country where we are being attacked from, it sets the stage for a “They were expendable” attitude. You start justifying allowing soldiers to die in Benghazi and of course in order to avoid so called innocent people you feed the war machine for the sake of profit alone. I don’t mind profit but I detest getting rich off of perpetual wars that kill the finest of our citizens, the soldier. There are times when things are necessary I suppose but I would like all presidential candidates asked this question. Would you be willing to destroy a whole country containing our enemies in order to save one American soldiers life? Then I would ask if them if it will be okay if they must die first in any war that gets started under their administration. Ponder that one please.

  • landofaahs

    As long as ISIS does not attack us in any way then that is not our problem. If they do then the whole country can be destroyed in order to save just one American. If you disagree, would you be willing to be the one American sacrificed? That is the least you could do since you seem so willing to offer others up for your idiocy.

  • landofaahs

    Are you willing to put yourself and your children on the front line to be sacrificed in order to keep the so-called innocents from getting killed?

  • Something Is Wrong

    You referenced riots in New York against the draft, and that’s a valid
    example of protesting but it wasn’t an anti-war protest, it was a
    protest to the government violating the militia system, overextending
    its reach, and forcing people to go fight against their will. There’s a
    pretty good reason why even though everyone still has to sign up for
    the draft, it hasn’t been utilized since Vietnam. Every time it is
    used, it creates problems and so does the government having all military
    power as granted to them by the National Guard Act of 1903. Even your
    example of the Baltimore riots is not really valid since that was
    between people who took different sides on the Civil War (North
    sympathizers versus South sympathizers) and bloodied the streets over
    which side they supported. The riot was connected to the war but was
    far from an anti-war riot. So you still have yet to provide me with an
    anti-war protest before 1903.

    Also, I’m sorry, but the militias were nowhere near nonexistant by the late 1800′s. They may have adopted the moniker “National Guard” but they were still very much a part of the militia system and answered to themselves and their governors, not to the President or any General in the regular military. In fact, Roosevelt used the Spanish-American war as his justification for the passage of the National Guard Act of 1903. He said that the Spanish-American war highlighted the inefficiencies and weaknesses of the militia system and that once we integrated everything under a single banner we would have an efficient force that would be able to defeat enemies in less time and with less loss of life. Just to put that into perspective, at the time of the Spanish-American War, Spain was one of the world’s leading military superpowers and the United States was considered as having a weaker military by the standards of the day. We kicked Spain’s butt in two weeks. Compare that to how we fight wars now or how any war since the passage of the National Guard Act of 1903 has been fought and it’s not hard to see that nothing at all has been improved and things have actually arguably gotten even worse. I have seen how the military works from the inside, trust me, there’s not much efficiency there at all.

    While you pooh-pooh militia involvement in the War of 1812 or even the Revolutionary War, you completely bypass every other war (there were actually quite a few) where the militia system is exactly where the strength really came from, such as the Civil War and the Mexican-American War. Even in the Revolutionary War, it was the strength of militias that eventually helped win the day. They suffered in the beginning partially because nobody was prepared (there was little to no real training), they were desperately low in supplies and arms whereas the British were very well supplied and armed, and also because a lot of the colonists really didn’t want to get involved right away. A lot of them really weren’t sure how the war was going to end and they didn’t want their families to feel the repercussions after the war was over from being branded a traitor to the crown (because any amount of logic at the beginning of the war would have dictated to just about any observer that the British would win). As people saw that the British had a real chance of being defeated, more people joined up, boosted the numbers and morale of the militias, and they subsequently improved and won the war. I mean, the presence of the French army along with their supplies and arms helped as well, let’s not forget that, but even then, the militia system was a strength, not a weakness. It wasn’t even the official way of doing things until after the war was over and the government was officially formed and the Constitution ratified. If it had been a hindrance or if experience had proven greater advantage to a strong central military over a militia system then the founders would have organized a central military organization… except that they didn’t (again, almost every nation in existence at that time had a centralized military, England, France, Germany,
    Spain etc.; the militia system was a huge departure from the norm and
    required more effort to figure out than a centralized military system
    would have).

    The National Guard Act of 1903 was far more than a formalization of what already was, it was a consolidation of powers that were never meant to belong in the President’s hands and it was the act that laid the foundation of every Progressive bill that has followed. It is the parent of the Military Industrial Complex that so many people hate. It is the parent of unjustified and unwanted wars. It is the parent of the whole gun control debate and the effort of anybody and everybody who tries to push that debate even further to confiscation. It is, to a large degree, the parent to the current indifference people have toward their communities and the disconnect to what is going on where you live. If you repealed the National Guard Act of 1903 and restored the militia system we started out with, our wars in places that the American people do not want to be fighting would quite simply end because they wouldn’t have the people to fight those wars. States would regain much of the rights and powers they have lost to the Federal Government. Gun control would completely die because in order to have a well-regulated militia, citizens MUST be able to freely own arms; and not just hunting rifles. The military industrial complex would effectively die where it stands because the federal dollars to keep it alive would no longer be there.

    I appreciate very much the discussion you have engaged in with me and that you’ve shared with me some of your thoughts on this. I hope I’ve been able to clearly convey my stance and what I’ve come to learn and understand about the effects of the National Guard Act of 1903 and why it needs to be repealed. If you can’t tell, I’ve researched this a lot and spent a considerable amount of time studying it. It is an effort that has led me to be totally convinced that of all the overreaching, big government progressive bills there are that need to be repealed in order to bring back liberty to this great nation, this bill is the first that needs to go and its fall will make possible the toppling of all the rest. It has just been around for so long now that everyone accepts it and doesn’t even think about it

  • Native Pride 1973

    Well, I can’t argue with that. You clearly know your stuff. And I am also a big support of the state militias, or state defenses forces as I they are now called, though I like Militia or state guard better, lol. They should become basically the next largest force that America has for its defense and minimize the role of the NG. I have been thinking of becoming more actively involved and joining them after I leave the service. Having the state run it actually makes it way more cost efficient on the US taxpayer than the NG and it takes away the power of the government much like you said. Thank you for spending the time and effort writing that.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Yep, 100% for me. Not my children, not that I have any yet, but thats why I put myself on the front so other people like you and the rest of America doesn’t have to.

  • Native Pride 1973

    Well, he could mean that we didn’t have enough evidence to go in there and get, but thank you for posting your source. I stand corrected.

  • Native Pride 1973

    To answer that question I would say, much like in the book/film Lone Survivor, that murder is still wrong no matter how you look at it. Its a tough one, but I guess that I would have to say its a lose-lose situation anyway and I would rather have the loss of one person rather than the blood of thousands of innocent women and children on my hands. But it would depend on the situation. In WWII during the planning of the invasion of Japan I would say, that the loss of the many via the atomic bomb would actually save lives of both the US and our allies and also the lives of most of the Japanese, considering that they would never surrender. But in the case of Iraq in 2003 or Afghanistan 2001, I would say that we are at war, not with the people of Iraq/Afghanistan, but that dictator/ruling party in charge of the country and the ideology of extremism. While it may not seem like it, I am actually an advocate of preemptive strikes, but I do have a conscious and I would have a hard time living with myself with the blood of many innocent people on my hands.

    Be sure to try and submit that question during one of those open forum debates that they are doing more of now.