Uh, then your belief is that we can only do one thing at once??
Not at all. But certainly, we do have limited resources. Quite clearly, the National Guard, for example, has fewer resources in the US right now because so many of their assets are in Iraq.
But that's not the main point.
The main point is the complete logical disconnect of the statement "they will follow us home." It's not like Al Qaeda guys in, say, Saudi Arabia who want to harm us in the US, don't know how to get to the US and harm us. And it's not like our presence in Iraq stops them from coming here.
And it's certainly illogical to say that when the US Army leaves Iraq, then our enemies will try to attack the US, but not before then. [ Parent ]
And at what force/equipment level do you thing that the National Guard be maintained at within its discrete state to assure adequate response to a natural disaster??
And would the requirement for the NG to patrol the border affect that state level?
Or would you withdraw from the world, and not put increased security on the borders??
Would agree that we increase the size of the military to cover what was previously understood as a portion of the NG's responsibility because of border patrol and/or disaster recovery??
I think your complaint about "they will follow us home" is that you, most likely willfully, misstate the concept. I refer you to my comment to BTD at 8:04AM today (above) and to MB at 10:28AM today (above). [ Parent ]
Make a new account