Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cirrus who wrote (100065)	8/23/2011 8:38:20 AM
From: tonto	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

When I read the question of using more air power to possibly accomplish the mission sooner, I immediately wondered what the answer would be...if it was possible or probable. McCain who was one of the supporters from the onset of greater military involvement asked a fair question...I do not see Chutzpah in the question. I recall comments when it was decided to increase our forces to Iraq to gain better control and the arguments against it. I believe at that time McCain was an early supporter of that mission too...this is an entirely different argument than going into Iraq in the first place, it is specific strategy. BTW, in comparison, the Libya decision wins hands down. Iraq was a horrendous decision. "Americans can be proud of the role our country has played in helping to defeat Gadhafi, but we regret that this success was so long in coming, due to the failure of the United States to employ the full weight of our air power," said Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who argued for a more full-throated U.S. effort.