Political Crossfire Forums

[The Newb]

Angelicus wrote: Nico wrote: Angelicus wrote: Alizard wrote: Angelicus wrote: then we should quit playing games with the Mullahs and the President of Iran, Ajihadistinadinnerjacket and take Tehran out yesterday.



Sure, we'll use all the spare troops who we aren't using to fight the other two wars we are currently in.

Oh, wait......

Alizard do the math.

1,000,000 minuse 170,000.

The United States has'nt done 1/10th of what it can do millitarily in either Iraq or Afghanistan.

IF the United States did, the appeasers and the BAF crowd would scream and whine and really be throwing the temper tantrums.


I'm sure it could do 10 times more, but not without a draft and societal mobilisation. When less than 1/2 the country agrees with your current path I would find it hard to see happening without some imminent national threat. damn democracy, tying your hands like that.
After watching the Iraq debacle I'm more convinced than ever that the US conventional military is the same beast it was in the 60's, with the same structural problems. I am also puzzled as to why there is the fascination with invading people and kicking ass from some quarters. My elders died to stop people from invading people. Are we saying it's now the done thing to project power by kicking in the doors of foreigners who look and act a little to our distaste? I'm genuinely dissapointed with what western power has become during 50 years; some kind of self-congratulatory, self-justifying dominance machine. It's basically a globally projected franchise for the purpose of keeping swarthy foreigners in line. And it's so x-box now, you can accidentally kill 100 people at a wedding, fly bombing missions on goverment issued methamphetamines and not feel a thing because it's not people, it's 'collateral'. Same story since I was a cricket, no change but the names of the countries. No surprises either, not given events like the USS Vincennes, what we did to Sukarno, Mossadeq, Allende et al.

Oh and here's a prediction: Iran won't be invaded in the near future.

Anax you know what, in a way, you are exactly right.

See there is a structural problem, we have a problem because we continue too allow the extreme leftist anti-America, blame America first crowd have any say whatsoever in what our millitary can and cannot do.

We continue to allow those people to litterally put a leash on our millitary by allowing them to dictate that such things as "rules of engagement" that say our millitary cannot go after someone thats shooting at them, because that person happens to be hiding in a mosque.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6542346/site/newsweek/

ive tried this in another thread the left wont listen they woul drather we be stuck in iraq twidling our thumbs than taking care of business and coming home

[Kane]

The Newb wrote: Angelicus wrote: Nico wrote: Angelicus wrote: Alizard wrote: Angelicus wrote: then we should quit playing games with the Mullahs and the President of Iran, Ajihadistinadinnerjacket and take Tehran out yesterday.



Sure, we'll use all the spare troops who we aren't using to fight the other two wars we are currently in.

Oh, wait......

Alizard do the math.

1,000,000 minuse 170,000.

The United States has'nt done 1/10th of what it can do millitarily in either Iraq or Afghanistan.

IF the United States did, the appeasers and the BAF crowd would scream and whine and really be throwing the temper tantrums.


I'm sure it could do 10 times more, but not without a draft and societal mobilisation. When less than 1/2 the country agrees with your current path I would find it hard to see happening without some imminent national threat. damn democracy, tying your hands like that.
After watching the Iraq debacle I'm more convinced than ever that the US conventional military is the same beast it was in the 60's, with the same structural problems. I am also puzzled as to why there is the fascination with invading people and kicking ass from some quarters. My elders died to stop people from invading people. Are we saying it's now the done thing to project power by kicking in the doors of foreigners who look and act a little to our distaste? I'm genuinely dissapointed with what western power has become during 50 years; some kind of self-congratulatory, self-justifying dominance machine. It's basically a globally projected franchise for the purpose of keeping swarthy foreigners in line. And it's so x-box now, you can accidentally kill 100 people at a wedding, fly bombing missions on goverment issued methamphetamines and not feel a thing because it's not people, it's 'collateral'. Same story since I was a cricket, no change but the names of the countries. No surprises either, not given events like the USS Vincennes, what we did to Sukarno, Mossadeq, Allende et al.

Oh and here's a prediction: Iran won't be invaded in the near future.

Anax you know what, in a way, you are exactly right.

See there is a structural problem, we have a problem because we continue too allow the extreme leftist anti-America, blame America first crowd have any say whatsoever in what our millitary can and cannot do.

We continue to allow those people to litterally put a leash on our millitary by allowing them to dictate that such things as "rules of engagement" that say our millitary cannot go after someone thats shooting at them, because that person happens to be hiding in a mosque.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6542346/site/newsweek/

ive tried this in another thread the left wont listen they woul drather we be stuck in iraq twidling our thumbs than taking care of business and coming home

Then your going a have a much harder time of finding people with which to "hand over power." Then your going to get the exact unified front that we've always wished for...only it'll be against us. We will, at that point, be seen as no more than a foreign military power completely exerting it's strength over them in order to obtain complete subservience.

When there's an action...there's a reaction.

How, exactly, do we "continue" to hand over power to the Iraqi's while seemingly becoming more aggressive towards their very population? :?

[Kane]

wannabe wrote: Kane wrote: If we really have 1 million troops and we're only deploying 160,000 in Iraq...

and allocating units exiting from Afghanistan to Iraq as NATO takes over there...

and our troops are serving extended periods of service for no apparent good reason...

and we're calling up National Guard reserves...

then I'm stumped as to why nobody's calling this administration out. :-|


for one thing the Guard is more expendible then front line troops.......but yeah, you make some good points.......

And just as effective at policing an entire country! :wink:

[Snake]

Quote:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 28, 2006 – The Iranian government is behind shipping components used to make improvised explosive devices to Iraqi insurgents.... There's a shocker

[Kane]

Kamel wrote: Quote:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 28, 2006 – The Iranian government is behind shipping components used to make improvised explosive devices to Iraqi insurgents.... There's a shocker

You wouldn't believe the look on my face... :lol:

[asainspace]

The Newb wrote: Angelicus wrote: Nico wrote: Angelicus wrote: Alizard wrote: Angelicus wrote: then we should quit playing games with the Mullahs and the President of Iran, Ajihadistinadinnerjacket and take Tehran out yesterday.



Sure, we'll use all the spare troops who we aren't using to fight the other two wars we are currently in.

Oh, wait......

Alizard do the math.

1,000,000 minuse 170,000.

The United States has'nt done 1/10th of what it can do millitarily in either Iraq or Afghanistan.

IF the United States did, the appeasers and the BAF crowd would scream and whine and really be throwing the temper tantrums.


I'm sure it could do 10 times more, but not without a draft and societal mobilisation. When less than 1/2 the country agrees with your current path I would find it hard to see happening without some imminent national threat. damn democracy, tying your hands like that.
After watching the Iraq debacle I'm more convinced than ever that the US conventional military is the same beast it was in the 60's, with the same structural problems. I am also puzzled as to why there is the fascination with invading people and kicking ass from some quarters. My elders died to stop people from invading people. Are we saying it's now the done thing to project power by kicking in the doors of foreigners who look and act a little to our distaste? I'm genuinely dissapointed with what western power has become during 50 years; some kind of self-congratulatory, self-justifying dominance machine. It's basically a globally projected franchise for the purpose of keeping swarthy foreigners in line. And it's so x-box now, you can accidentally kill 100 people at a wedding, fly bombing missions on goverment issued methamphetamines and not feel a thing because it's not people, it's 'collateral'. Same story since I was a cricket, no change but the names of the countries. No surprises either, not given events like the USS Vincennes, what we did to Sukarno, Mossadeq, Allende et al.

Oh and here's a prediction: Iran won't be invaded in the near future.

Anax you know what, in a way, you are exactly right.

See there is a structural problem, we have a problem because we continue too allow the extreme leftist anti-America, blame America first crowd have any say whatsoever in what our millitary can and cannot do.

We continue to allow those people to litterally put a leash on our millitary by allowing them to dictate that such things as "rules of engagement" that say our millitary cannot go after someone thats shooting at them, because that person happens to be hiding in a mosque.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6542346/site/newsweek/

ive tried this in another thread the left wont listen they woul drather we be stuck in iraq twidling our thumbs than taking care of business and coming home

Another typical "it's the fault of the left" statement, strewn in the paranoia of the day.

We invaded a sovereign nation that was no threat, had no ties to Al-Qaeda (dispite the constant connection made by those who support the war. Where is the factual evidence?) forcing a resistance to erupt and rebel against our actions that have led to the deaths of 100,000 people (not verifiable due to the "We don't do bodycounts" attitude of the occupying powers) and all you are worried about is that Iran is supplying weapons to these Shia insurgents????

Where is the justice for those we have killed?

Where is the commemorations and memorials to the people we have destroyed in our unjustifiable war in Iraq? A 9/11 every month for the nation we have destroyed.

Where is the accountability on our governments for the tragic mistakes they have made?

Why are you people still pushing this completely wrong claim that Saddam harboured terrorists when you know fully well Saddam had no links to the Al-Qaeda agenda? You know that if anything Al-Qaeda was a threat to Saddam aswell.

We have been here for a long time now, the US destroyed any credibility it had with the betrayal, lies and contempt for the nation it has helped push to the brink of disintergration. Rather than banging your drums to your political masters and the patriotic hysteria that demands obedience, always believing you are so right, you should be feeling ashamed that you allowed your integrity to be hijacked by liars and a political ideology that is bent on the massacre of innocent people.

You are a sick person to believe that you can justify the policy that the US has followed in Iraq. We also see that through the negligence of Afgahnistan post invasion, the arrogant attitude that prevails has come back to haunt you most horribly...........and I suppose it is always someone elses fault for resisting foreign invaders in their own nation, no matter what their beliefs or ideology are. The US has stuck it's finger up to the sovereignty of others, yet can't stand the attacks against it's own.