![]() |
Quote:
Yes, I was being VERY tongue in cheek. |
Quote:
|
The Chinese and the Frech both failed to hold Nam time and time again.
Puppet dictators will always fall with retribution, and occupation only lasts as long as the other side has a worse social policy. I didn't live through the times though, but many forsaw the spread of the red "threat". |
Quote:
It's worth noting that there's a fair amount of evidence JFK was intending to pull us out. http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/11/22/vietnam/index.html |
Quote:
Mul, I want to see proof that the dead in those caskets are primarily dead conservatives. |
Quote:
|
We're not the only ones talking about the ad:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-060713pols,1,3376709.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true |
Quote:
Its not "waffling" to revise a failed policy. If it were, all of you pilots would fly into mountains. "Well, I set the course 3 hours ago, I can't adjust it now, that'd be waffling." We made a big mistake going to Iraq. We made an even bigger mistake going there without a plan. We need to change course, and we need to do it now. That's not "giving in" to the terrorists, that's plain old common sense. To hang around hoping something good will happen, that the body count will drop, is as idiotic as saying "bring it on." I don't "hate" either party, but right now, the only one offering any kind of change of direction are the Democrats. Bush has thrown 7 interceptions and been sacked 15 times. He and his line need to go. The back-ups might be untested, might not have a "plan" to make up the dozen touchdowns we spotted the other team, but do you really think they will do worse than what we have already seen from the first string? |
It's hard to have any kind of faith in a system where your choices are either (1) evil or (2) the lesser of two evils.
Sadly, that's the situation we're in, with little hope for meaningful change in the foreseeable future. |
I haven't seen any plan from the Democrats regarding...well anything.
Their entire platform is "We'll do what Bush isn't doing!" Then you ask them what that means and they say "This administration is incompetent!" Then you ask them what their plan is and they say "We need change!" I have yet to see any plan put out by the Democrats. They can't even agree on what to do with Iraq, some want to pull out now, some want to set a timetable but refuse to vote for a resolution which sets a timetable, some don't want a timetable, yadda yadda yadda. |
Yes you have, and you rejected it. You and I argued about it 6 months ago, it was Murtha's call for redeployment. You thought it was a terrible plan.
And it is a terrible plan. Unfortunately for America, it's better than the only other plan Bush has left us, called "stay the course." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
1. The military leadership are running the war. 2. There has never been a more effective or humanitarian war in the history of mankind. 3. It is very possible, in fact probable, that the war couldn't have been waged better, in fact it could have been really SNAFU had it been waged any different. It could have been a lot worse, a whole lot worse, had it not gone exactly like it has. BTW...What the RATs are doing is not "waffling," they are wholesale undermining the war effort and, therefore, encouraging the enemy. |
Quote:
2. I agree...but, there was early acknowledgment that we were going to be engaged in a guerilla war and that we didn't have enough boots on the ground. The civilian leadership was painfully slow to react. Again, the military has done amazing, humanitarian things that stay below most peoples awareness. But, mistakes were made, get over it. 3. No. BTW, YOU have opinions, I have INFORMED opinions. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Seahawk could be right, but he could also be catastrophically wrong...The top dogs seem to disagree with him, and they are waging the war quite successfully. |
Mul, I am waiting for you to call seahawk a LIB (or RAT) traitor. Of course he is saying many of the things I was saying early on, but I guess only someone of a conservative mind set is allowed to make these comments and not get painted with the treason brush.
Rumsfeld is a arrogant failure. He overrulled his general's advice about troop levels, tactics and overall stretegy. The did what they were told to do and the results have not been pretty. Rumsfeld isn't exactly a career military guy. He has never seen combat, and he spent very little time in the service. It takes a pretty outsized ego to handle things the way he did. We went in light and left a bad security mess to mop up -- This was absolutely predicted. He was warned as much. Even when it was clear that this was a problem he did not adjust to the situation. Instead he played this game of say he would only bring more troops if he was asked for them. Of course it was made plenty clear to the COs that they better not ask for more. Anyway, I guess Bush and Rumsfield would have a much better idea of what is going on there on the ground than somebody plugged in.. Huh? |
Quote:
Don't think for one second I am denegrating the men and women on the ground. There are no better, regardless of service. I know since I have seen them both up close and personel as well as in weekly briefings on their progress and requests for assistance. And not just in Iraq and Afganistan. Big world out their Mul, you should have known I was addressing the whole, not just Iraq. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website