Have you checked up your ass? On Jul 18, 10:14 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > AND WE ARE ALL STILL WAITING TO SEE THEM.... where are they ?? > > > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > How the hell do YOU know how "tight" the formations were or were not. > > PLEASE stop this inane pretending that you know more about tactics and > > strategy than our generals because you were "in the service." LOL! > > > >Our invasion was honestly about WMDs. > > > You starting to make me think that you're a teenager on the bosses > > computer in the office between your shift as fry cook at McDonalds. > > Were you in a coma in the year prior to the Iraq war? It sounds like > > it. > > > I can understand "moderates" disagreeing with the invasion of Iraq on > > any number of grounds. But you spout the whacko leftie lies like a > > good little commrade. Stop pretending. > > > On Jul 18, 7:08 pm, Frederick The Moderate > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > "> We thought he had poison gas. Our soldiers were equipped to > > > confront > > > > > it. > > > > Everybody thought he had WMDs, mostly because he not only HAD them but > > > > because he used them against his enemies." > > > > Anyone who's been through basic strategic training knows that you > > > don't go into Iraq with divisions in tight formations (as we did) if > > > you think the enemy has WMD's (at least not ones that are still any > > > good - we knew the ones WE gave thme were no longer a threat). > > > But okay I get it. You guys really want to believe a certain way and > > > that's fine. I can understand not wanting to believe that your leaders > > > had motives other than those publicly stated. So fine. Bush never lied > > > or spun a thing. Our invasion was honestly about WMDs. And our love > > > for the Iraqi people who needed Liberation. Because the role of the > > > American government is to ust invade anyone country that isn't nice. > > > Besides, according to those same leaders, the Iraqis would welcome us > > > with open arms. > > > > If nothing else, I can understand your wanting to believe the way you > > > do. > > > > On Jul 18, 11:07 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did. > > > > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state > > > > > Actually, they were. Iraq had completed construction of a nuclear > > > > reactor (That makes you a nuclear nation state) but Israel immediately > > > > blew it up. (Thank you Israel). > > > > > Some people would say that a leader who builds a nuclear reactor > > > > despite worldwide protests and has and uses poison gas on neighboring > > > > countries and his own people was a dangerous guy. Other people like > > > > deluding themselves. > > > > > On Jul 18, 1:42 pm, Frederick The Moderate > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did. > > Large, > > > > > tight formations are easy targets and we know that. Not to mention > > > > > that we would have sent a least one division to sweep and search the > > > > > area where we "knew" the WMD's were for residual (or any other) > > > > > evidence they ever existed. We never did. Not one peek. I'm former > > > > > navy intel and i can assure you, even though Bush screwed our Humint > > > > > network fro some time to come, we still would have been able to find > > > > > evidence - if believed it was ever there. > > > > > But I get it. You really, really, really want to believe there were > > > > > WMD's there. Okay. > > > > > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state but > > > > > again, if you really want to believe it is or was, okay dokey. > > > > > > Talk about wanting to believe lies. > > > > > > I've lost five friends in Iraq. All of them Psy-Ops and a couple > > Force > > > > > Recon. They've made it clear for years that Iraq will never > > appreciate > > > > > what we've done and no matter how long we're there, they'll regress > > > > > shortly after we leave. Two thousand years of culture. > > > > > Iraq has already made clear they view US as outsiders and went out of > > > > > the way to spit in Bush's face before he could get out of office. But > > > > > you believe what you want to believe. > > > > > > On Jul 18, 7:23 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >>> We also had the certainty that there really were no WMD's > > > > > > > Not true. > > > > > > > >>> Urban warfare, their commitment to keep fighting people they > > viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any kind of > > > > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation. > > > > > > > Once again you show little understanding... Both AQ and the > > > > > > Americans are outsiders... As is the harsh form of Radical > > Islam... > > > > > > As is the lowland Pakistani... The question here is not fighting > > the > > > > > > outsider BUT WHICH OUTSIDER... The exit strategy? Stability and > > a > > > > > > non Radical Islamic government in a nuclear nation-state... > > > > > > > >>> I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border them. > > They had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics & technology > > have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful only at blowing up > > weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's a mess > > > > > > > and a mistake and we should get out. > > > > > > > Tactics and technology make a huge difference... As the fact the > > our > > > > > > WILLINGNESS and desire to be a long term occupying power is far > > less > > > > > > than the Russians or the Pakistanis as makes a difference... The > > > > > > Russian border aided in supplying their troops but harmed the "Soft > > > > > > Warfare" in being seen a a long term occupying power... > > > > > > > >>> The only upside is at least we're actually going after people > > we have truthful cause to go after. > > > > > > > Once again you proclaim Urban Lies... > > > > > > > On Jul 18, 3:58 am, Frederick The Moderate > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I agree with you about Iraq. We had so many sanctions on Iraq > > before > > > > > > > invading, they couldn't import dental equipment (because it could > > > > > > > possibly be modified for weapons use - go figure). We also had > > the > > > > > > > certainty that there really were no WMD's. So it was nothing to > > storm > > > > > > > right in. Like you said, cakewalk getting there. It was afterward > > the > > > > > > > problems started. Urban warfare, their commitment to keep > > fighting > > > > > > > people they viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any kind > > of > > > > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation. > > > > > > > I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border them. > > They > > > > > > > had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics & > > technology > > > > > > > have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful only at > > > > > > > blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's a > > mess > > > > > > > and a mistake and we should get out. > > > > > > > The only upside is at least we're actually going after people we > > have > > > > > > > truthful cause to go after. > > > > > > > > On Jul 17, 11:40 pm, "d.b.baker" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Iraq was [almost] a cake walk, compared to what we face in > > > > > > > > Afghanistan. Even with enough troops (500,000 +/-), it'll take > > a > > > > > > > > generation to pacify Afghanistan - a mountainous moonscape the > > size of > > > > > > > > Texas covered with 70-million ants (nomads, warring tribes - > > barefoot, > > > > > > > > illiterate villages). There's nothing there to "rebuild," it's > > all > > > > > > > > from scratch. The people are suspicious of everything, even a > > simple, > > > > > > > > local hydro-pump to generate electricity. > > > > > > > > > Then there's Pakistan, blood-brother to Afghanistan; we'll > > never > > > > > > > > subdue one without subduing the other. And by that time we'll > > be > > > > > > > > broke, no longer a viable nation - which makes the whole surge- > > > > > > > > strategy a lethal mistake.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > Mark M. Kahle, ,www.filacoffee.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
