Clinton’s decision to invade Somalia was to prove that he was a capable Commander-in-Chief. He made the decision emotionally, not based on the facts, or he would have done one of two things:
1. Not invade.
2. Invade with a force sizable enough to destroy any resistance.

We either have to decide to crush the enemy, or not bother. Clinton (and liberals, in general) seem to think we can throw a few stones, and the enemy will run away, and we can all sing “Kumbaya”. That is wrong-headed. The Republicans who led the charge to get us out of Somalia were using it as a political weapon. That is also wrong-headed.

You assume I am a Republican. You also assume I stand by the “party line.” I am a Republican, but by no means do I stand by the party line. Remember what happens when you assume?

What our enemies say and think should not drive our policies, but we should take them into account. If a country declares war on us, should we ignore them? Because, after all, we are letting what they say and think “drive our policies” if we declare war on them, right?

John McCain is a putz. I would refuse to vote rather than vote for him.

Oh, and for the “logic” – your first argument is a combination of logical fallacies, known as “Fallacy of Accident” and “Irrelevant Conclusion”. Whether Republicans voted to leave Somalia is irrelevant to the discussion – this is almost an ad hominem attack – and you can’t draw conclusions on my stance on any particular issue just because I stand with the Republicans on the War On Terror.

Your second argument, that we would be “letting them lead us around by the noses”, is the logical fallacy of “Begging the Question.” You assert premises about our policy and the enemy’s thoughts and words that try to presuppose your “conclusion.” Basically, your argument has no weight.

They did do that. A lot of them. John McCain was one of them. Must I go get the links to show you the floor speeches they made, calling for withdrawal, while at the same time asserting Congress’ Constitutional right to put limits on our troops involvement overseas? If it was wrong to withdraw from Somalia, then all those Republicans (including McCain who now opposes withdrawal) were wrong then, right?

And quite honestly, I really, really, really don’t like having our military strategy and foreign policy dictated by what our enemies say and think- it means we continuously give them the initiative and let them dictate our responses. That’s the equivalent of letting them lead us around by our noses, and it’s strategically foolish.

We make decisions based on what’s good for us, and we will fight our enemies regardless of whether they think we’re “weak” or “strong” or “resilient” or whatever. We should rationally decide, not emotionally “show.” There’s a difference, obviously.

Anyway, the military is nearly useless IMHO for stopping terrorist attacks on the US. For that you need competent police, security and intelligence work. And willing and enthusiastic cooperation from other countries. For example, the plot to blow up a dozen or so American transatlantic jets was foiled by British intelligence and police work, with an assist from Pakistan.

Sorry I haven’t added any comments lately. Been busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest.

And to the other commenters: Wow. How quickly we forget. The bad guys in Somalia (including a guy named “Osama”) DID follow us here. And they struck us on September 11, 2001. The 9/11 commission made it very clear that there was a direct path (using quotes from Bin Laden, himself) between how we “tucked our tails and ran” in Somalia, and how they were emboldened to attack us on 9/11.

In Vietnam, when we ran, 100′s of thousands who had supported democracy and who were “on our side” in Vietnam were jailed, tortured, and/or killed. We are stabilizing Iraq. Do you think Saudi Arabia and some of the other gulf states would sit back and let Iran take over Iraq? Do you think they have a “civil war” over there, right now? If we leave, we will truly see a civil war.

Also, speaking of guys in caves, where’s that Osama guy?

But this time, they will follow us.

I don’t see any reason to believe this; nor do I see any reason to assume a worst case scenario upon redeploying most soldiers.