T1B

..this is an offshoot of Nish's "War President" thread that had devolved into numbers crunching by the time i got there. The comment below caught (read: pissed me off) my attention. I think it deserves it's own thread.

Atomic Punk wrote: You Brits need to understand many here don't like this shit either. A few of us actually served in the US military and I don't see a whole lot of support for this shit.

Oh, really?

I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Some dumbfucks (people who didn't serve) try to say that Iraq is W's Vietnam. Bullshit. The only way that Iraq would be comparable to Vietnam is if our own elected leaders pull the rug out from under the troops who are over there willingly doing their job.

And if the Dems take over Congress this election cycle, I'm afraid that's exactly what will happen. So? The soldiers who actually fought, died, and got permanently maimed... their sacrifice will have been in vain, just a total waste of a valiant effort.

Fuck that noise. I don't care to dis-honor those soldiers by telling them "oops, sorry... this was all just a horrible mistake in the first place".

But don't take former military word for it. Talk to the ones who're on active duty right now. I have talked to several guys back on leave and getting ready to return. Talked to an Army special ops guy just last night, and he's all about getting back there and helping to finish the job, no matter what that takes. To a man, that's how most them probably feel.

So enough with the hand-wringing politically motivated bullshit, already.

Let our boys finish the damn job they were sent to do.

holy shit. someone gave you a gun?

They don't call him 8 Toe for nothing.

Funny. The story I heard was Half Nut or something like that.

War Wagon wrote:I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Come to Rochester and I'll introduce you to a guy who just got back from Iraq this summer who, after two tours, thinks this war is a complete and total clusterfuck.

Or, if you don't feel like upgrading from Bud Light, stay at home and email one of the 20 or so Iraq vets who are running for Congress in opposition to the war.

Mister Bushice wrote:holy shit. someone gave you a gun?

Holy shit, someone gave you a forum to mod?

Come on now, Bsmack. Whitey has talked to several guys.

BSmack wrote:

War Wagon wrote:I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Come to Rochester and I'll introduce you to a guy who just got back from Iraq this summer who, after two tours, thinks this war is a complete and total clusterfuck.

Did you meet this guy at a Hillary '08 rally?

Don't worry folks, the Democrats have no plan (or intention) of bringing the troops home.

This goes far beyond your silly, two-party system, and regarding matters this weighty, it's none of the American taxpayer's business.

War Wagon wrote:

BSmack wrote:

War Wagon wrote:I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Come to Rochester and I'll introduce you to a guy who just got back from Iraq this summer who, after two tours, thinks this war is a complete and total clusterfuck.

Did you meet this guy at a Hillary '08 rally?

Naw, Wags, two words: Glory Hole.

Swallow your choad before you post, B. It isn't polite to speak with your mouth full.

War Wagon wrote:..this is an offshoot of Nish's "War President" thread that had devolved into numbers crunching by the time i got there. The comment below caught (read: pissed me off) my attention. I think it deserves it's own thread.

Atomic Punk wrote: You Brits need to understand many here don't like this shit either. A few of us actually served in the US military and I don't see a whole lot of support for this shit.

Oh, really?

I served, ...

War Wagon wrote:
But don't take former military word for it.

I won't. Especially yours potato scrubber.

Atomic Punk wrote: ...potato scrubber.

Alrighty then, bedpan scrubber.

You sure made a great case for why there "isn't much support here" for your boy Nish, though.

Christ, what a pathetic little nutlicker.

Arguing with you is pointless. My comment you took out of context was in reference to strategy and how to conduct this war. There is this old cat named Sun Tzu who wrote "The Art of War."

I'm sure you've never heard of it, which is why arguing with a moron such as yourself is pointless.

I didn't take anything out of context, you moron.

You said there wasn't much support here (in trying to snuggle up to Nish's short gnarlies), and I called you on it.

You glossed yourself as former military. I'm surprised you didn't get fragged.

But you're right about one thing. There's no point in you arguing a damn thing with me.

Okay then, I won't bother arguing with a fucking idiot such as yourself. Not worth the time or energy.

Ta Ta bitch.

Actually, it doesn't take much time or energy to put you in your place.

By all means though, don't bother extending yourself.

Gratuitous "your a dumfuck" just to keep up appearances.

Martyred wrote:Don't worry folks, the Democrats have no plan (or intention) of bringing the troops home.

Ok, so that's a point worth discussing.

Most of the dem attack ads have been about how badly this war has been going.

They might not pull out in the next two years (Dubya won't let that happen), but certainly in '08 that will get some major run on the Dem Presidential platform.

Thing is, to resolve the problems over there is going to take longer than that.

America's biggest fault is it's lack of patience.

Starting to look a whole lot like the 2000's version of Vietnam to me.

kcdave wrote:Starting to look a whole lot like the 2000's version of Vietnam to me.

Mighty big paint brush yer sportin' there, dave. Care to defend your take before the wolves rip out your liver?

I mean, again...?

Atomic Punk wrote:My comment you took out of context was in reference to strategy and how to conduct this war. There is this old cat named Sun Tzu who wrote "The Art of War."

Read Sun-Tzu's book; re-read both threads; still missed your reference. Apparently, subtleties escape me, Punk.

But seeing you buried by War Wagon didn't.

BTW, Sun-Tzu never served in the American military, Punk.

Sayin'.

BTW, Sun-Tzu never served in the American military, Punk.

Sayin'.

You are bright.

Truman wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote:My comment you took out of context was in reference to strategy and how to conduct this war. There is this old cat named Sun Tzu who wrote "The Art of War."

Read Sun-Tzu's book; re-read both threads; still missed your reference. Apparently, subtleties escape me, Punk.

But seeing you buried by War Wagon didn't.

BTW, Sun-Tzu never served in the American military, Punk.

Sayin'.

I guess both you and Wags are both war masters. I've stated my opinions many times on this topic. Thanks for the insight on Sun Tzu not serving in the American military. I'm so humbled. By the way, you didn't get used copies of those books with lines highlighted by Sharpies did you?

War Wagon wrote:Did you meet this guy at a Hillary '08 rally?

Nope, not even close. Funny thing is, he's even more racist than you (if that's possible) and would be a total GOP honk. But he can't get past that asshole in the White House who put his life on the line for no reason.

War Wagon wrote:Let our boys finish the damn job they were sent to do.

I'd be all for that, if I knew what that job was. I'm guessing your answer will be something like, "When a stable Iraqi government is in place, our boys will have finished the job they were sent to do." But it will be a government imposed by us, and we're really not at war with the Iraqi government anyway, at least not since Saddam was captured. While it's rare for me to do this, I actually do agree with you that, in many ways, what we're doing in Iraq is nothing like Vietnam. Ironically, while the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam were officially not wars, but police actions, they were far more like wars than that in which we are currently engaged. We had our military forces fighting their military forces, with the goal of forcing a surrender. Such is not the case in Iraq, where we are truly engaged in a police action. Our soldiers are not fighting their soldiers, but are there to try to prevent chaos and anarchy while a government is being created. (Remember, according to Chimpy, the combat portion of this exercise in futility ended years ago.) The combatants against whom our forces are battling are not fighting on behalf of a government, like our troops are, but are acting independently, or on behalf of Allah, or some puppetmaster hiding in Afghanistan. So who in this yet-to-be-stabilized government will be able to speak on behalf of those who are killing our troops to get them to surrender, or promise not to engage in any further terrorist activity once we pull out? And given the country's and the region's history, what will we have to see to be convinced that this government we're hoping for will actually be "stable" enough to stand on its own without our presence? We've already been fed multiple spin jobs about why we invaded and why we stayed after no WMDs were found. And I'm not really even that concerned about hearing what our exit strategy is. I just wanna know what the exit criteria are.

America's biggest fault is it's lack of patience.

You're right. We should have exercised far more patience before creating the mess that we're gonna have a helluva time getting out of. Shrubya shoulda listened to his daddy. But regarding the patience to which you are alluding, how much do you suggest we exercise? If it becomes apparent (if it hasn't already) that what we hope to accomplish cannot be completed in ___ number of years, at what point do we cut our losses? What number should fill in the blank? 5? 10? 20? 50? Or do you just parrot Dubya's refrain of "Stay the course, don't cut & run, no timeline can be imposed"? As I stated earlier, I wouldn't mind staying the course if I knew where it ended and had an estimated time of arrival. To put Bush's "plan" in Air Force terminology, he's all Mach, and no compass heading.

Mister Bushice wrote:holy shit. someone gave you a gun?

Likely before he got that dog (now deceased). Otherwise that poor fucker would have been capped in the back yard versus getting flattened by a truck.

I am one of those who did not serve. I have many friends who did and a close friend who died in Vietnam.

Now, those friends who did serve in Vietnam will call bullshit on all of your statements.

The US had and has the ability to impose our will on Iraq. The applicaiton of overwhelming force is well with in capabilities. But Washington is again calling the shots and constricting the boots on what they can and cannot do.

Look up a few Vietnam vets Whitey you fucking idiot. I know 2 who's son's are currently in country Iraq. They are livid that we are just fucking around over there, not getting the job done. Kinda of looks like Vietnam to them, but hell they were just there, so they could not possibly be qualified to draw that analogy.

Iraq has very little hope of self-governance. When the US forces are removed from the region, the bloodbath will redouble.

We've depleted our resources fighting a non-nuclear power, while two hostile nations are going about becoming nuclear powers. The timing of the Iraq War was very ill-chosen. It's a real shame that a) our pre-war intelligence was so pitiful, and b) no one would have been interested in anything but their own intelligence anyway. There were smart people in the Bush Administration who were counseling patience in the lead-up to war. The stupid people won the day, and now we're embroiled in a big bloody mess, with bigger messes on the horizon.

Listen up, now - FUCK Rumsfeld for treating the US Military as his personal plaything, and for treating Iraq as his War Crucible.

Also, FUCK Dick Cheney for lying, for pursuing agendas ahead of the agenda of the American People, and for making himself scarce as his machinations collapsed around us.

Racks for Smackie and PSUFAN.

mvscal wrote:

War Wagon wrote:They might not pull out in the next two years (Dubya won't let that happen), but certainly in '08 that will get some major run on the Dem Presidential platform.

If the Iraqis haven't taken responsibility for their own security after five years, then we should pull out.

Ah, so now we have timelines.

Why do you hate America?

War Wagon wrote:..this is an offshoot of Nish's "War President" thread that had devolved into numbers crunching by the time i got there. The comment below caught (read: pissed me off) my attention. I think it deserves it's own thread.

Atomic Punk wrote: You Brits need to understand many here don't like this shit either. A few of us actually served in the US military and I don't see a whole lot of support for this shit.

Oh, really?

I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Some dumbfucks (people who didn't serve) try to say that Iraq is W's Vietnam. Bullshit. The only way that Iraq would be comparable to Vietnam is if our own elected leaders pull the rug out from under the troops who are over there willingly doing their job.

And if the Dems take over Congress this election cycle, I'm afraid that's exactly what will happen. So? The soldiers who actually fought, died, and got permanently maimed... their sacrifice will have been in vain, just a total waste of a valiant effort.

Fuck that noise. I don't care to dis-honor those soldiers by telling them "oops, sorry... this was all just a horrible mistake in the first place".

But don't take former military word for it. Talk to the ones who're on active duty right now. I have talked to several guys back on leave and getting ready to return. Talked to an Army special ops guy just last night, and he's all about getting back there and helping to finish the job, no matter what that takes. To a man, that's how most them probably feel.

So enough with the hand-wringing politically motivated bullshit, already.

Let our boys finish the damn job they were sent to do.

I'll just plain say "fucking RACK!"

How can the Iraqis take responsibility for their own security? Is it even possible at this point? Iraqis are members of tribes first, and "Iraqis" second. This is a fundamental reality. These tribes have hated each other for centuries. They will continue to do so, regardless of the events of the past few decades.

"Iraqi security"...is there a more ludicrous phrase currently extant? We stuck our thumbs into this pie very unwisely. There is no glorious conclusion to this miasma.

The claim that "they will welcome us with open arms" is so inane that it borders on the criminal. Were they talking about the populace that they "Shocked and Awed"? What purpose did the "Shock and Awe" crap intend to serve? We bomb and frighten and kill the people that are then supposed to welcome us as liberators?

This is some uniquely untrammeled horseshit, indeed

mvscal wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:How can the Iraqis take responsibility for their own security?

By fighting for it, idiot.

By fighting us, you mean?

War Wagon wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote: ...potato scrubber.

Alrighty then, bedpan scrubber.

You sure made a great case for why there "isn't much support here" for your boy Nish, though.

Christ, what a pathetic little nutlicker.

No shit, I was no SEAL or anything, but, the day I ride douchelord's scrotum is the day I polish Hugo Chavez's boots. Well, Atomic Skank's probably already doing just that.

take a closer look at the freaks who are taking potshots at us over there and assess their objectives

I'll agree with that. When you do so, you'll find that rather than an "Iraqi", you have:

-a Kurd
-a Shi'ite
-a Sunni

These groups will always be at odds. Our involvement changed nothing in that regard. We have not succeeded in bringing the groups together (we have tried), and as a result, upon our leaving, there will be unleashed civil war - which has really bad consequences for the whole region, and our foreign policy objectives as well.

mvscal wrote:I'm sure you've been raised to despise your country

Not at all. I’ve been raised to think for myself, and not to blindly follow a seriously flawed leader. I love my country, and I’d like for others around the world to love my country. Not terribly likely with our present administration.

warren wrote: No shit, I was no SEAL or anything, but, the day I ride douchelord's scrotum is the day I polish Hugo Chavez's boots. Well, Atomic Skank's probably already doing just that.

How reactionary with your brain disengaged. Maybe I have a different vision on how to conduct this war since we are committed? Nooo, just read without comprehension and take statements out of context. That's we have multiple tards on these boards. Arguing with tards is pointless so I'll leave it at that.

warren wrote:

War Wagon wrote:..this is an offshoot of Nish's "War President" thread that had devolved into numbers crunching by the time i got there. The comment below caught (read: pissed me off) my attention. I think it deserves it's own thread.

Atomic Punk wrote: You Brits need to understand many here don't like this shit either. A few of us actually served in the US military and I don't see a whole lot of support for this shit.

Oh, really?

I served, and I know many others who have also, from all branches of the Armed Forces, and I haven't talked to a one who thinks we should bail out before the job is done.

Some dumbfucks (people who didn't serve) try to say that Iraq is W's Vietnam. Bullshit. The only way that Iraq would be comparable to Vietnam is if our own elected leaders pull the rug out from under the troops who are over there willingly doing their job.

And if the Dems take over Congress this election cycle, I'm afraid that's exactly what will happen. So? The soldiers who actually fought, died, and got permanently maimed... their sacrifice will have been in vain, just a total waste of a valiant effort.

Fuck that noise. I don't care to dis-honor those soldiers by telling them "oops, sorry... this was all just a horrible mistake in the first place".

But don't take former military word for it. Talk to the ones who're on active duty right now. I have talked to several guys back on leave and getting ready to return. Talked to an Army special ops guy just last night, and he's all about getting back there and helping to finish the job, no matter what that takes. To a man, that's how most them probably feel.

So enough with the hand-wringing politically motivated bullshit, already.

Let our boys finish the damn job they were sent to do.

I'll just plain say "fucking RACK!"

You had your chance. You failed. Dismally. Shut up, now.

Our single biggest fuckup had nothing to do with Don Rumsfeld or his alleged "agenda". Our biggest fuckup was sidelining the true power brokers in the country: the tribal sheiks.

True enough. Yet, it was the leadership of Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush that chose the path that we had to take. They did so while ignoring a lot of wisdom on the matter, emanating from both sides of the aisle.

Our eventual disengagement with Iraq has little to do with Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, in all likelihood. They have no answers, they have no plan. What they have remaining is people like Hannity, who will help them shroud their mistakes, to befuddle the ignorant populace, and to help obscure the real consequences of their failures - for the immediate aftermath, at least.

The irony is that the Dubya/Rumsfeld strategy from the start was to cut and run. We were going to knock off Sadam's army, hand the ball off to the grateful Iraqis, and then get the hell out. Dubya envisioned Iraqis like the people of Whoville, joining hands around the Christmas tree and singing "Sockoo Four-Eyes" or whatever the fark that song was.

Then the big plan switched to "stay the course," a moronic euphemism Dubya borrowed from his idiot father.

Now our troops are hunkered down, trying to survive meaningless patrols while serving as targets for every Iraqi nutball with a gun, slingshot, or RPG, waiting for the mythical day when we "win the war."

Great "plan."

How do we win the war, mvscal?

Seriously, now (and I mean it.), how does the statement "let our boys finish what they started" (a laudible statement) exactly equal "Winning the war" (An end result that we all want.).

Do you mean that if all orders are carried out, the miltary ends the job the way it was originally planed, EVERYONE in that country will be happy? If not, what constitutes winning the war?

I'm honestly interested in everyone's opnion (and that's all you are allowed to voice.).