Political Crossfire Forums

Thats so cute.

You're adorable.

It would be a lot harder than occupying, say, afghanistan. Could they do it while maintaining our current military deployment obligations?

I would say the logistics of such a thing would make it impossible.

It would be far more difficult than fighting a major war in two theaters, for example. It would be literally impossible to have uninterrupted supply lines for your troops with an in country domestic enemy of any consequence operating. Do you seriously think that soldiers in the US military would stand by and follow orders as Americans are forced into slave labor so the war machine could keep supplied?

I don't think so. It's quite simply megalomania to think that could happen or would in any way be a desirable political outcome. lol

the US is already occupied by police forces and national guard. they don't need to use only the military. for the 4500th time dharma.

barney fife is not the same thing as military occupation.

lol okay. police are militarized tyrants one day but suddenly when it's convenient for you they're don knotts.

Exactly.

more like barney fife, in the role of a militarized tyrant, fingering roadside booty and tasing teenagers to death.