You Ain't Gonna Like Losing - Page 2

Superman · 10-24-2007, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dantilla

In WWII, people understood the ramifications of failure: No more U S A.

That's not the case today. The rift is between those that see this war as another necessity to assure our existance, and those that think if we ignore terrorists, they will ingore us.

You're truly a nice guy Dan. It flatters me to call you a friend, and I value the friendship highly. But you know better than this. It's not a matter of believing the terrorists are going to ignore us.

It's a matter of just how their victory might be feasible. They will not defeat us with bombs. (Nor will we defeat them this way) If they defeat us, it will be on the ideological battlefield.

Here's another way of putting it. If we did nothing, then there would occasionally be a bomb explosion somewhere. Unfortunate, but far short of a defeat. In that world, we could and would find these people and rarify the bombings. There would be nothing even thinly reflecting a terrorist victory. But if America is divided (between the funamentalists and the modernists, for example)......if government becomes invasive with wiretapping and warrantless searches and evidenceless, termless detainments and other powers, then the terrorists are manipulating us. That is their goal. The other goal, recruitment and marketing, is aided by American iron-fistedness and imperialism.

So....okay.....sure......let's not argue the details again but it's disingenius to pretend that liberals just think terrorists will be nice to us. If I thought that about a group of people, I'd dismiss their ideas too.

Racerbvd · Racerbvd's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by widebody911

Exactly: Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military.

Well, I didn't know that I had the problem when I tried to sign up. You???

Mule · 10-24-2007, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superman

You're truly a nice guy Dan. It flatters me to call you a friend, and I value the friendship highly. But you know better than this. It's not a matter of believing the terrorists are going to ignore us.

It's a matter of just how their victory might be feasible. They will not defeat us with bombs. (Nor will we defeat them this way) If they defeat us, it will be on the ideological battlefield.

The brain of steel strikes again. In your mind there exists ideological defeats?

Here's another way of putting it. If we did nothing, then there would occasionally be a bomb explosion somewhere. Unfortunate, but far short of a defeat. In that world, we could and would find these people and rarify the bombings. There would be nothing even thinly reflecting a terrorist victory. But if America is divided (between the funamentalists and the modernists, for example)......if government becomes invasive with wiretapping and warrantless searches and evidenceless, termless detainments and other powers, then the terrorists are manipulating us. That is their goal. The other goal, recruitment and marketing, is aided by American iron-fistedness and imperialism.

I'm with you! What the hell if we lose an occasional airport, nuke plant or oil refinery and the economy crumbles as a result, at least we're not imperialists!

So....okay.....sure......let's not argue the details again but it's disingenius to pretend that liberals just think terrorists will be nice to us.

I don't think that's it at all. No stones is my guess!

If I thought that about a group of people, I'd dismiss their ideas too.

You'd be correct then.

frogger · 10-24-2007, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobra

Personally, I think things are much too easy, not enough sacrifices being required of citizens whose country is essentially in a death match. Too fearful of screwing the pooch on the economy I suppose, shame really. How are people going to take it seriously if it has little or no impact on their day to day lives?

+1

DanL911sc · 10-24-2007, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobra

Personally, I think things are much too easy, not enough sacrifices being required of citizens whose country is essentially in a death match. Too fearful of screwing the pooch on the economy I suppose, shame really. How are people going to take it seriously if it has little or no impact on their day to day lives?

Yikes... thats some backwards logic. If something has no actual impact on your day to day life, what gives me the right to say "you don't take this seriously enough! things are too easy for you!! you don't make enough sacrifices!! open your eyes, ignorant fool, I know things you don't!! adhere to my ideology! blah blah!!" ?

Lay bare your agenda, and we can start discussing the points....

futuresoptions · 10-24-2007, 02:13 PM

Eventually this thing will involve all of us no matter how we feel about the situation or try to express what we feel is the culprit or powers to be. The only thing that will matter at that time is what we have on the inside that helps us survive. THAT will be the deciding factor of any debates we may have on this forum. I feel that we have made so many B movies about these rag heads that we actually believe that they can't shoot, they can't think and that they can't win. I believe other wise. I feel they will do anything in their power to acheive victory while we sit and argue about right and wrong. They have something that binds them together and the strings that used to tie us together no longer exist in the majority. I believe this is where RacerBVD was coming from in his intial statements. I believe that no matter how naive he may be on his comments that there is simple underlying truths in what he has said. I have stated before that we as a society have let the previous generations down in what we have allowed to transpire in our country. Those who would ask for solutions instead of debate must first set aside their idiotic tendencies to question and instead open their mind to common sense facts.

tabs · 10-24-2007, 02:27 PM

Alot of people in this country and the world think Terrorism is a law enforcement problem. It is not, we are at war with Islamic Fundlmentalists. The stakes are EVERYTHING...one good dose of radiation in a major USA city will stop the Global Economy in its tracks. Cash Flow is the life blood of the empire we have created. Without cash flow, your out of a job without prospect of getting another one...etc

Even if the Japs didn't bomb Pearl Harbor in 41, the USA would have eventually gotten in the thick of things. In September FDR ordered the US Navy to escort convoys to mid Alantic..the Germans sank a USA destroyer in the Fall of 41 (The Ward??), so the US was in a defacto war with Germany. When the Japs bombed Pearl FDR and Churchill sighed a breath of relief, cause now they knew that the Allies were going to win....eventually.

Did FDR know ahead of time..the Jap codes had just been broke a short time before...however the deciphering and flow of information up the chain of command was slow and spotty. Some might point to the Aircraft Carriers being out to sea that weekend. However if U knew the Japs were going to attack Pearl, why would you risk any part of the fleet...why not have them sail the midnight before U knew the attack was going to take place. Have your fighters deployed so that when the Japs came over you could surprise them??? Nope while the leadership of the USA suspected that the Japs were up to something they really had no idea it was Pearl Harbor that was the Japs target.

The attitude of the people of the USA was completely different than now. People knew it was a death match with Facism and Japanese Bushido they were engaged in. They were willing to accept loses, hugh loses. There was Black Marketeers for things that were rationed. but generally everybody supported the war. Guys that were conscienous objecters signed on for being Corpmen. Nobody went around saying the war was unnecessary, cause they all knew it was. It was the last good war...to end an evil.

FDR and Churchill knew the Death Camps were in operation yet refused to bomb them, on the gorunds that the Germans would claim that the war was truly about the Jews. To avoid that appearence they refused to even bomb the rail lines into the death camps...That was a terrible error on their part, tht caused hundreds of thousands of lives..at the least..

DanL911sc · 10-24-2007, 02:46 PM

Don't forget our war against the domestic separatist/religous terrorists... Ruby Ridge, Waco siege, Timothy McVeigh & Terry Nichols, Eric Robert Rudolph, Clayton Waagner.

One good thing about 9/11 is that these groups have seen their mind-share drop precipitously.

Mule · 10-24-2007, 02:57 PM

Here's what losing buys us.

THE 'PEACEFUL' RELIGION

And now for your friendly radical Muslim update. An Egyptian weekly paper has done some investigating into Egyptian text books. It turns out that a popular Quran commentary for children contains vehement incitement against Christians and Jews, and calls on [Muslim] children and adults to fight them.

One of the interpretations reads: 'Allah commands the believers to fight all the infidels who do not believe in Allah and in the Latter Day [i.e. in the Day of Judgment], who do not follow His instructions regarding what is allowed and prohibited, and who do not believe in the true faith, which is Islam - i.e. the Jews and the Christians'...

And that is just the beginning, folks. In Pakistan, forget about trying to go to school if you are a non-Muslim. The Talebanization of Pakistan is getting worse as the government refuses to stand up to the thugs.

One case involved a Catholic-run public high school in the Swat Valley, which is now being overrun by the Taliban. In a recent letter, a group called Janisaran-i-Islam (Sacrifices of Islam) attacked the school administrators for "forcibly converting students" and "encouraging un-Islamic behavior."

The group called for the firing of all Christians employed by the school and demanded that extremist Muslims replace them. The group then threatened suicide bombers if its orders were not followed. And rather than standing up against the Taliban, the local government actually agreed to the letter. It ordered that all of the female students cover their heads to preserve local Islamic morality ...

DanL911sc · 10-24-2007, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabs

The attitude of the people of the USA was completely different than now. People knew it was a death match with Facism and Japanese Bushido they were engaged in. They were willing to accept loses, hugh loses. There was Black Marketeers for things that were rationed. but generally everybody supported the war. Guys that were conscienous objecters signed on for being Corpmen. Nobody went around saying the war was unnecessary, cause they all knew it was. It was the last good war...to end an evil.

Well, there's a little rose-tinted hindsight in your description, but its mostly correct. The reason, I believe, is that WWII was very much a recognizable war. We had just fought a similar war against largely similar enemies and come out ahead. The leaders and weapons changed, but the struggle was similar -- and not only were there clear victory conditions, but we believed we would achieve them.

This time around, none of us recognizes the fight we are in. We can get everything from: the terrorists that attacked us are all dead so there is no one to fight, to: we are at war with the entire Islamic world. The truth, as always, is somewhere in between.

One way this conflict differs sharply from WWII is that the victory conditions are as debatable as any other aspect of this conflict. How do we know we've won? Do we have to be attacked again to lose? Or does pulling out of Iraq constistute a loss? By that logic if we ever close our last base in Japan (or Germany), we've "lost" WWII!!

Its when viewing perspective like that the "War on Terror" looks far too much like the "War on Poverty" or the "War on Drugs". Victory is not practically achievable, and it seems a loss can occur if we so much as alter our tactics...

Actually, how do we win...?

Dottore · 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by futuresoptions

Eventually this thing will involve all of us no matter how we feel about the situation or try to express what we feel is the culprit or powers to be. The only thing that will matter at that time is what we have on the inside that helps us survive. THAT will be the deciding factor of any debates we may have on this forum.

In WWII you had a tyrant (or several) waging agressive war against sovereign states without provocation. The US entered the war only after it was attacked directly at Pearl Harbour. In that war the allies were defending this aggression, and had justice, morality and an all-singing-and-dancing-Jesus on their side.

In Gulf Two, the US waged an aggressive war against an innocent sovereign nation (Iraq) and did so illegaly, without UN approval, on a deliberately false pretext that even its long standing European allies refused to countenace. The US did so in response to an isolated terrorist act perpetrated by Saudi, Yemenite, Egyptian and Pakistani nationals from caves in Afghanistan. Iraq had zero connection to the terrorist act (9/11) that gave rise to this war.

Two Questions:

1. How thick do you really have to be to fail to understand this distinction?

2. Why is anyone surprised that the 'resolve' of the American people in these two situations is not the same?

DanL911sc · 10-24-2007, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mule

Here's what losing buys us.

THE 'PEACEFUL' RELIGION

And now for your friendly radical Muslim update. [...]

Its not all bad, we'll finally stop women from driving: article.

Quote:

For the first time since a demonstration in 1990, a group of Saudi women is campaigning for the right to drive in this conservative kingdom, the only country in the world that prohibits female drivers.

DanielDudley · 10-24-2007, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tobra

You can run Byron down all you like for his presentation, but it will not change one simple fact.

You still ain't gonna like losing.

You can say that like you know what is going to happen, but you don't.

Read my lips. Diplomacy doesn't make one weak. Wasting effort and resources makes one weak.

Being domineering makes one unpopular on the playground. The Iraqis didn't turn their country into a disaster area, and niether did Saddam.

If you are going to make everything black and white, you probably need to go see the eye doctor.

Dottore · 10-24-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanielDudley

.

Diplomacy doesn't make one weak. Wasting effort and resources makes one weak.

Being domineering makes one unpopular on the playground. The Iraqis didn't turn their country into a disaster area, and niether did Saddam.

Great points. Amazing though - how many don't seem to get them.

DanielDudley · 10-24-2007, 03:57 PM

BTW, GW doesn't even stand in the shadow of Roosevelt or Churchill.

I have a relative in Iraq right now. He signed up because he had friends in the twin towers when they went down, and he wanted to kill some of those towel heads who were responsible. And do you see anything wrong with that reasoning ? So off we go to Iraq, and we do a lot of pinpoint bombing. Only it is not so pinpoint, and there are a lot of civilian casualtuies, who, just like my relative, want to get even.

What we have done in the name of good has created a result that makes us look like the worst Nation on the face of the planet to a good many world citizens. The comparisons of GW to Adolf Hitler are few in the US, but copious in other countries. People are flocking to oppose us, and you make them all monsters. Some of the major White House players are skulking away. Plenty of resources were invested in creating a quagmire that we haven't resolved in the time it took to win WW2.

Force Peace. That would be an oxymoron. Wherever the US Army shows up, opposition will follow. But it is true. During WW2 the US was united in opposition to world domination by a Fanatical leader and his followers. I see the value in that. Attempting to dominate a two bit middle eastern country does not make us liberators. It makes us occupiers.

I almost couldn't believe it when Busch came out with the statement that the only mistake we made in Vietnam was not finishing the job. And just how would he know ??? I saw the results on our economy of that debacle. And what was Georgie boy doing ? Guess what kids, deja vu all over again. Only now he's holed up at the Ranch. Peachy.

Superman · 10-24-2007, 03:58 PM

Mule, it sounds like you find this all very scary. My America is not as frightened as yours is. Barney Fife was a loyal deputy but.....not the personna I want the world to associate with America. I hope Dubya and the rest of the cowards fall out of the majority soon. I think you guys already have.

But.......too late for some damage control. Our nation's image is not the only casualty. Civil rights are under attack like no time in history. All in the name of fear. When the "administration" says "Be afraid, be very afraid," you appear to obey. America has become quite an embarrassment because of its apparent sense of terror. And naivete'. Fear has been a popular political tool for many centuries.

Flatbutt1 · 10-24-2007, 04:49 PM

I'm of the thought that we won't be allowed to lose. The US may stop fighting with one hand behnd its back and bring out the other fist. Then things will really get ugly...BIG time..and possibly everyone will lose.

futuresoptions · 10-24-2007, 05:26 PM

The Patriots that won the American revolution did so not by playing by the rules... They hid behind trees to fire on the British that would foolishly line up in formation to fight. They failed to make the changes needed in order to win (and I am sure that someone among them had to mention "Hey maybe we should take some cover") While others were complaining that "No we cannot do that it is uncivilized, nonmilitary.... We are in the same position now, but we are now the British. One must look at the war we are actually fighting, who the enemy is and what they are doing in order to win the war by baby steps. I don't think that GW gets it and I don't think the left get it either. I think we are all stuck in the middle of a bunch of losers that cannot see the forest for the trees. Ultimate victory with this enemy can only be achieved by going against who we are as Americans. The only thing for us to truly question is whether or not we are willing to do what needs to be done in order for our country to survive and for OUR children to have a better future. I will not say what needs to be done but I know that TRUE victory in this case will come at a bigger cost than taxes and the lives of the soldiers it will take to get the job done. It will take us selling our souls for the right to life... I know that many of you cannot understand this philosophy but I can tell you from what I have seen in my life to be true.

sammyg2 · 10-24-2007, 06:16 PM

Good story, but unfortunately it has one flaw. The anti-war flip-flopping bleeding heart libs won't mind losing, they are used to it.
Did I just call them losers out loud? Oops, sorry about that

J/k

sammyg2 · 10-24-2007, 06:21 PM

Quote:

The Patriots that won the American revolution did so not by playing by the rules... They hid behind trees to fire on the British that would foolishly line up in formation to fight.

Well, at least you're half right. The militia fought unconventionally, often taking cover. The formal colony military fought just like the british, in well structured, civilized rows.
Both groups were patriots.