Case for War: In Defense of Freedom Preview 4 of 7

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle travels the globe articulating, defending and debating the neoconservative case for an assertive American foreign policy. Perle finds no shortage of candidates willing to challenge him on these issues.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• War
• 911
• 9/11
• Afghanistan
• Iraq
• Qaeda
• Taliban
• Terror
• Terrorism
• Neocon
• Neoconservative
• Richard

[MrPotatoesLatkie]

No American troops should die for Iranian freedom. Instead, the Iranians must do the fighting themselves. I've opposed to welfare warfare. Do it yourselves!

[QuartuvLarry]

Perle makes a good point. Fuel the opposition, but don't send in our sovereign armies. Good balance, perhaps, but if the nuclear situation gets out of hand, we'll have no choice.

[44warjunkie]

Zarqawi was in Iraq prior to the invasion. He was under the group Ansar al-Islam then changed it to Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad then changed to Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

[yanikv]

They (neo-sons) ARE NOT AMERICANS!!! THEY HAVE ACTED AGAINST AND SHALL CONTINUE TO ACT AGAINST THAT COUNTRY WHICH HAS GIVEN THEM SO VERY MUCH!!!

[yanikv]

The worst aspect of this vermin (perle types) is that they have mastered a method for couching their true beliefs and designs under fake altruism. He and his foul ilk speak compassionately about the rights of women, the plight of abused groups and individuals, even their fellow Americans...but the fact remains that he cares for none. His loyalties lie far far away in foreign lands which is why they are, in point of fact, traitors to this state.

[satanrocks668]

1. is this man even capable of speaking without being a propagandist?

2. does he know he is doing this?

3. is it purposeful?

4. is he capable of taking actions that are truthful?

5. is he a good role model?

6. is it right to use the methods he is using?

7. is there such a thing as being right?

8. is there any chance of overcoming these guys?

[MrPotatoesLatkie]

Also, the cost in lives and, money of an already heavily indebted America would lead to greater harm for us. Unless, however, you see our military as being one industry that America still leads the world in, so we could help our defense contractors by fighting Iran.

That wouldn't help most Americans, though.

[MrPotatoesLatkie]

During that time, the majority of Japanese and, Germans were not for our idea of "FREEDOM," so there was no great movement to overthrow their own governments. We didn't attack them because of their government system, but because of what their governments did, likely with the support of the majority of their people.

The Iranians should decide what to do themselves when the majority of their people decide to follow revolutionary leaders.

[MrCropper]

"No American troops should die for Iranian freedom. Instead, the Iranians must do the fighting themselves. I've opposed to welfare warfare. Do it yourselves!"

Just like the Germans and Japs freed themselves?

The only thing American soldiers should NOT die for is a new but still authoritarian government, like we're doing in Iraq. If we invade IraNNN, we should do it like we did in WWII - no vote, no elections, just a new constitution based on America's.

FORCE THEM INTO FREEDOM!!!

[richardrichard07]

The US should stop sending Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman and Kuwait billions of petro dollars. The US could get oil from the North sea and central Asia whilst they find an alternative energy source, such as ethanol, which is used in Brazil.

[thelastofthemohicans]

I totally agree. However, it's more difficult to turn a buck, if you're not involved.

[KenMacMillan]

The problem is that Iran & Suadi Arabia are sending money & terrorists in to fight. I think that since we've already made the mistake of invading Iraq we commited ourselves to eliminate radical Islam from the middle east. To late now, the commitment has been made.