Nick M said:
Takening a hill then giving it back and losing men, isnt winning.
You cant beat an enemy if you dont know what the enemy looks like.
Veitnam Part 2?
- Thread starter SupraMario
- Start date
- Status
Takening a hill then giving it back and losing men, isnt winning.
You cant beat an enemy if you dont know what the enemy looks like.
Adjuster
Supramania Contributor
We are working on rebuilding Afganistan, but it's going to take time, and patience. This area of the world has been under constant war for centuries or longer, so it's a way of life really for them. (Khan had trouble occupying this area, so why should we be any different?)
Iraq has WMD. They have many things that for whatever reason the current administration has not presented any of the items found to the media. I think Bush W. is just fed up with the whole deal, and wants to get the job done, but could give a shit about the public opinion at this point, and the media is the public opinion these days. Every month they find caches of chemical weapons, arms and technology they were not supposed to have that was sold to them by the French, Germans and Russians, and we do nothing. I've seen photos of Foxbat Mach 3 capable fighter aircraft with the current high tech weapons systems direct from the Russians... And French missile systems and German computers and communications systems outlawed by the UN.
The reality is we should have wiped out Saddam in 91, but failed to do so. Going back with fewer troops was not smart, but it's what was left over after the Clinton era cuts in our military... (Think about this, in 91 we were fully build up for war with the Russians, a war that was averted by Reagan pushing a weapons system the Russians could not afford to build, so they went bankrupt... And the cold war ended with us using much of the troops, machines and support to kick Saddam's paltry bunch in the ass.)
Today our forces are designed to be more fast action, and have less troops and other support type people to fight a major war. To get back where we were, to really take this to the next level will take a serious war effort on the part of the USA, and I don't see it happening untill some terrorist set's off a nuke or two in this country. (That will wake up those that have forgot, or want to forget about the act of war Islam planned and did to us on 911.)
Then it will become the holy war of all holy wars. The "west" v/s Islam. And the countries who want any part what's left of the middle east, and other "Islamic" lands will participate or sit out on the sidelines when it's all over and the oil and other bounty is split up between the victors.. and I can only hope it's the USA coming out on top of this next world war.
The next major war will be over oil, and religion. (Just like many wars today, and many from the past and ones we have not even thought about in the future.) Everyone needs the oil, and everyone has a religious opinion, even if it's no official opinion. (IE China.)
Speaking of China, what is that country going to do in the future? They have a huge problem with over 125,000,000 men who will never be married in that country. (There are no women there to marry them. So many years of state control on how many kids they could have has created a situation where more men than women survived, and now the number has become pretty dang huge.) These 125,000,000 men will either become gay, or leave the country, or are cannon fodder that China could use to attack many other places if they wanted to. That country is a tinder keg just waiting to go off IMNSHO.
Iraq has WMD. They have many things that for whatever reason the current administration has not presented any of the items found to the media. I think Bush W. is just fed up with the whole deal, and wants to get the job done, but could give a shit about the public opinion at this point, and the media is the public opinion these days. Every month they find caches of chemical weapons, arms and technology they were not supposed to have that was sold to them by the French, Germans and Russians, and we do nothing. I've seen photos of Foxbat Mach 3 capable fighter aircraft with the current high tech weapons systems direct from the Russians... And French missile systems and German computers and communications systems outlawed by the UN.
The reality is we should have wiped out Saddam in 91, but failed to do so. Going back with fewer troops was not smart, but it's what was left over after the Clinton era cuts in our military... (Think about this, in 91 we were fully build up for war with the Russians, a war that was averted by Reagan pushing a weapons system the Russians could not afford to build, so they went bankrupt... And the cold war ended with us using much of the troops, machines and support to kick Saddam's paltry bunch in the ass.)
Today our forces are designed to be more fast action, and have less troops and other support type people to fight a major war. To get back where we were, to really take this to the next level will take a serious war effort on the part of the USA, and I don't see it happening untill some terrorist set's off a nuke or two in this country. (That will wake up those that have forgot, or want to forget about the act of war Islam planned and did to us on 911.)
Then it will become the holy war of all holy wars. The "west" v/s Islam. And the countries who want any part what's left of the middle east, and other "Islamic" lands will participate or sit out on the sidelines when it's all over and the oil and other bounty is split up between the victors.. and I can only hope it's the USA coming out on top of this next world war.
The next major war will be over oil, and religion. (Just like many wars today, and many from the past and ones we have not even thought about in the future.) Everyone needs the oil, and everyone has a religious opinion, even if it's no official opinion. (IE China.)
Speaking of China, what is that country going to do in the future? They have a huge problem with over 125,000,000 men who will never be married in that country. (There are no women there to marry them. So many years of state control on how many kids they could have has created a situation where more men than women survived, and now the number has become pretty dang huge.) These 125,000,000 men will either become gay, or leave the country, or are cannon fodder that China could use to attack many other places if they wanted to. That country is a tinder keg just waiting to go off IMNSHO.
Yes Geezer, it is assumed none of us have the full knowledge of what is going on, only what we are told, since none of us have been there on the front lines or in Centcom or anything.
I am just stating what I believe is correct based upon what I know from various sources.
DeadCell, bro, that isn't at all what I got out of your first few posts, but if you say so man.
Here's what I read:
Also, I was missing something about the red tape deal. What are they doing wrong? What would you do differently?
And seriously, your posts on the bottom half of pg 3 sound like they were written by someone else, doesn't sound at all like the same position. Schizo.
One thing I hadn't noticed before:
Besides, we hear threats all the time, who knew what ones would materialize?
@ Adjuster, definitely agree with you there. I think everyone knew Iraq had WMDs and all the other stuff, or else why would they be BSing the UN inspectors. We knew they had stuff, and the world is safer with that stuff out of a madman's control.
Anyway, I better stop before I start to ramble. Night all.
I am just stating what I believe is correct based upon what I know from various sources.
DeadCell, bro, that isn't at all what I got out of your first few posts, but if you say so man.
Here's what I read:
And here's what I got out of it: You were asking how can politicians push for that, and it sounded to me like the war on terror. Wasn't it? And you said you were against what the politicians were making them do, which I assumed was fight in Iraq. Anyway, not to start another argument but this guy was a lot more at fault than the politicians. Personal responsibility, man. So, if that wasn't what you meant, what was?DeadCell said:
Also, I was missing something about the red tape deal. What are they doing wrong? What would you do differently?
And seriously, your posts on the bottom half of pg 3 sound like they were written by someone else, doesn't sound at all like the same position. Schizo.
One thing I hadn't noticed before:
You know all the crap Bush received for the war? Now imagine all the crap he woud've gotten for starting a war with no tangible evidence for the American people. Half the country already hated him. The war would've been seen as even more of a 'Daddy's War' than it is now, and he might not have even gotten Congressional approval to do it.DeadCell said:
Besides, we hear threats all the time, who knew what ones would materialize?
@ Adjuster, definitely agree with you there. I think everyone knew Iraq had WMDs and all the other stuff, or else why would they be BSing the UN inspectors. We knew they had stuff, and the world is safer with that stuff out of a madman's control.
Anyway, I better stop before I start to ramble. Night all.
ChadMKIII said:
No, I was basicly saying how can politicians push for something that isnt justified. Basicly saying why the hell are we in Iraq and not Afraghanistan still fixing it. hell we havent even captured bin laden. This guy yes, but as I stated before, it was just one of the last stories I read. Also like I have stated before, if the kid had a record, why the hell is he in the army to begin with.
ChadMKIII said:
Our soldiers over there are police, not soldiers, they roam the streets and battle small battles. You wanna win a war, you gotta wipe out pretty much everything first. get the country back do to the bare minimum.
LOLChadMKIII said:And seriously, your posts on the bottom half of pg 3 sound like they were written by someone else, doesn't sound at all like the same position. Schizo.
no I wrote that. When I'm pissed sometimes I'm not the clearest of people.
ChadMKIII said:
He received all the crap cause he LIED TO US.
People dont like being lied too. If the war was so justified, I would have backed him %100, and so would people in america. well most.
but lying to everyone, and then using afraghanistan as a staging ground to get to what he wanted to go to, isnt what I call justified.
ChadMKIII said:
Uhhh, Iran Ne1? or What about North Korea. Sadam was happy with his little reigh of terroristic dictatorship control. he was the least of our worries. Iran syria, North Korea, Afraghanistan, I think those places need to be put on a higher thought process lvl than Iraq at the moment.
suprageezer said:
Look at almost every video, interview, documentary, article, ect.
they all show that US troops arent fighting a war, but are being peacekeepers/police. you cant complete your objective very easily if you troops cant do anything unless they are attacked.
D34DC311 said:
LOL, that is rich. I guess I'm a "barbaric killing machine" being that I've been in more than one conflict. :nono:
I never lost my head when watching the tracers heading the wrong way, staying cool as a cucumber, yet I lose my cool on a routine basis when working at my current job.
Just like everyone else in the world, soldiers approach their jobs as jobs, they just tend to be more professional than most when doing their job. Funny thing is, it seems that the media likes to single out the nut job servicemen.....
D34DC311 said:
Lay out of list of all the times that Iran & N Korea actually used their WMD's. Pretty short list, eh? The difference here is Saddam used his on numerous occasions, therefore it's known that he doesn't bluff & he's extremely dangerous with WMD in his hands.....
rakkasan said:
LOL, well I guess I've watched to many war movies, but knowing your killing someone and takin it easy wouldnt be real simple for me.
rakkasan said:
When did he use his WMD? he used bio weapons, but that isnt to say that other countries dont do the same thing.
hell, there are quite a few countries right now who just got nukes, and are testing them. Sadam was just more singled out than the other guys. In no way am i defending the psychopath, but I'm not going to say he is any worse than the rest of the crazy religious dictator nut jobs out there.
D34DC311 said:
HUH? Biological weapons are WMD's. The difference between Saddam/Iraq & the rest of the countries is that he used them as weapons, while to date, everyone else has used them as deterrents. That's a huge difference. HUGE difference.
D34DC311 said:
I'm not implying that killing someone is easy, just that war does not make one a killing machine. You are trained to "engage targets", but ultimately, you do realize that the target has a little hate filled Kool Aid pumper within his evil & wicked chest, so it's never "easy". The most important training any soldier/Marine recieves is knowing that not every person that isn't wearing a uniform has a hate filled Kool Aid pumper, so positively identify your target before sending rounds down range.
rakkasan said:
Small arms are WMD, not a nuke.
Look at africa, more people die there everyday because of AKs and hand guns.
the 2 nukes we dropped on Japan are a fraction of the dmg that happens in 1 year in a war tore country with small arms problems.
D34DC311 said:
What? That's a horse I just can't ride. Small arms are considered point weapons (they do damage to anything between point A & point B), whereas NBC weapons are area weapons (the do damage to anything with the effected area). Sorry, but I think your logic is flawed....
Should we go back to stones & clubs?
rakkasan said:
How is my logic flawed?
The number of people killed from small arms fire will always out number those who will die, if a nuke or bio weapon goes off.
yes Nukes are massive destruction, but its a small # compaired to how many lives are lost each day to hot lead.
A death is a death, weither or not it came from a nuke or bio.
Your logic is flawed because with your logic, cigerettes are a bigger WMD that small arms are....
D34DC311 said:
Regardless of logic, lets look at oficial classification.
WMD's are WMD's cuz when they are used, it only takes 1 to do massive damage.
Arms in Africfa are not WMD's. It takes mutpiple shots to do any reasonable amount of damage. There just happens to be a whole lotta nuts with AKs in Africa.
That doesn't make an AK a WMD.
Problem Solved.
How did he lie? You, nor anyone else, can't prove that he used Afg. just as a ploy to get into Iraq and finish Daddy's business. Thats just things you would like to believe cuz the media tells you. Just curious how you thought he lied. I too would like to see more manpower in Afghanistan activley hunting the Taliban, but they have at least gotten rid of one ruthless dictator.
The reason they have to act as police it because the guerillas aren't obvious military personnel, they act, dress, and look just like civilians, so our boys can't always tell right off if they're about to kill a ruthless terrorist or some poor little girl's daddy. They can't just go in there and kill everyone they see. They try to eliminate as many terrorists as they can, while still preserving innocent life.
WMD's are WMD's cuz when they are used, it only takes 1 to do massive damage.
Arms in Africfa are not WMD's. It takes mutpiple shots to do any reasonable amount of damage. There just happens to be a whole lotta nuts with AKs in Africa.
That doesn't make an AK a WMD.
Problem Solved.
Didn't we all just admit to Suprageezer that we only know what we are told? Anyone with half a brain can recognize that the media in our country (esp CA-I don't know how bad it is wherever you are) is heavily biased left. They would all prolly committ suicide before giving Bush credit for anything, neither of which would be all that bad. They portray news how they like. So, we don't know how much they have really found over there. We know they have already found some, but who know how much for sure, and what we found isn't necessarily all there is.DeadCell said:
How did he lie? You, nor anyone else, can't prove that he used Afg. just as a ploy to get into Iraq and finish Daddy's business. Thats just things you would like to believe cuz the media tells you. Just curious how you thought he lied. I too would like to see more manpower in Afghanistan activley hunting the Taliban, but they have at least gotten rid of one ruthless dictator.
The reason they have to act as police it because the guerillas aren't obvious military personnel, they act, dress, and look just like civilians, so our boys can't always tell right off if they're about to kill a ruthless terrorist or some poor little girl's daddy. They can't just go in there and kill everyone they see. They try to eliminate as many terrorists as they can, while still preserving innocent life.
ChadMKIII said:
My point about small arms fire being a bigger destructive cause than 1 nuke, still stands.
as for him lieing to us.... uhh, you didnt watch the press releases from him did you.
he sat there and said that they didnt find anything and that it was a screw up on the CIA, FBI part.
Why lie about not finding WMDs? that makes no since, the whole war was put into action and they used the WMD ploy to get over there.
why the hell would you lie and say no we didnt find anything.
If anything, it would help justify the war if they found something.
that made no since at all what you just posted.
I love the ones who Proclaim He's a Liar. I love to ask them to their faces if they have ever met the man, do they actually know anyone that has met the man. 100% of the time the answer is NO, so if they have never met the man or anyone that has, how is it they proclaim he's a liar? I'll tell you exactly how, it's like a bad joke, and by the time it gets to the 10th person it in no way resembles the original joke. So here we have people who call themselves Americans Proclaiming GWB is a liar CAUSE, someone's brother's neighbor's daughter's aunt saw a TV show that claimed on Joe blows internet site that his cousins uncle heard him say a lie. Are you freaking kidding me didn't any of you naysayer's learn anything in 13 years of free school? Everything you know is acquired since not one of you can produce a film file showing GWB in a lie. If there were a file that existed it would be played Every night day in day out but the Communist Left Wing Media. So I challenge every one of you wizards who Proclaim GWB is a liar to produce the evidence OR admit you are programmed and you have learned from this experience.
D34DC311 said:
Yay! You're doing my work for me!
You just negated the point you were trying to make.
As you typed, the CIA, FBI, and whoever else they got their intel from 'made a mistake'. This is not the same as lying.
So, if you're a repairman, and someone asks you if you have a part, and you were sure you did so you say yes, but then find out you don't have it, are you lying? No. You made a mistake. That happens.
BUT, I believe the admission of a mistake was just to get the media off them. Personally, I believe he still had them and sent them to Syria or something before troops could uncover them. Its not like he didn't have enough warning or anything.
No one can prove Bush or anyone else in his admin, the CIA, FBI, w/e intentionally lied. Period.
- Status