-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
And what if the enemies will to fight increases by killing them
Then you kill some more until either their all dead or they loose their will to fight. You could easily say killing japanese in WW2 increasd their will to fight. In fact didnt we enter WW2 because some of our own were killed. This is the normal human reaction. You people live in a fantasy world. If some one punches you in the nose you hit them back. According to you as soon as your hurt you should pack it in and give up. Of course killing the enemy will piss him off and make him fight harder. This is the point. Its a matter of wills. Im afraid most liberals have no backbone for this sort of thing. War insmt pretty or easy. You cannot show weakness in the face of the enemy. This is the worst thing you can do. This is exactly what the Dems do. All they care about is regaining power at any cost. They make me wanna puke.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
You cannot show weakness in the face of the enemy. This is the worst thing you can do.
Yet that is exactly what Bush did. Got our forces into a position without proper support, and did not reinforce them as needed to hold the areas that needed to be held. Folks have finally said, "You don't want to do what it takes to win, let's get the hell out."
They've show plenty of weakness in the face of the enemy by sticking to a broken plan.
Quote:
They make me wanna puke.
I'm ready to puke every time some clown drapes themselves in the flag claiming they are beyond reproach and any that oppose them oppose our troops etc. They make me wanna toss my cookies on a regular basis.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Yet that is exactly what Bush did. Got our forces into a position without proper support, and did not reinforce them as needed to hold the areas that needed to be held. Folks have finally said, "You don't want to do what it takes to win, let's get the hell out."
Oh so now their in favor of the war? Thats news to me. In fact accordding to you now they think were not doing enough and should escalate our our force levels . Wow how did I miss that?
Quote:
I'm ready to puke every time some clown drapes themselves in the flag claiming they are beyond reproach and any that oppose them oppose our troops etc. They make me wanna toss my cookies on a regular basis.
Yeah me too.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Oh so now their in favor of the war? Thats news to me. In fact accordding to you now they think were not doing enough and should escalate our our force levels . Wow how did I miss that?
By paying as little attention to what is really happening as Dubya I suppose. There were quite a few concerns that the effort would require far more than Dubya had budgeted or planned. Moderates pointed it out, but were shushed by Dubya and his supporters.
It is the moderates and independents that are now abandoning the Whitehouse. They were ignored for too long. The bulk of the American people have lost faith in Dubya's ability to manage the war. He's been in reactive mode for at least two years and we don't see signs of it changing. We've come to recognize that we are no longer controlling what will happen. The other problem is if you do ramp up now, could Dubya's Administration team make it work? They don't have my confidence, nor do they have the bulk of Americans' confidence.
As I've pointed out (and I'm now seeing others do the same), it is time for us to start planning to withdraw to force the Iraqi's to take responsibility for themselves. They have to start acting on their own. If they can't figure out how to do it in the next year, then it's a lost cause anyway.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
By paying as little attention to what is really happening as Dubya I suppose. There were quite a few concerns that the effort would require far more than Dubya had budgeted or planned. Moderates pointed it out, but were shushed by Dubya and his supporters.
Yup thats why I opposed this invasion from the start. I knew we didnt have the balls for it.
Quote:
It is the moderates and independents that are now abandoning the Whitehouse. They were ignored for too long. The bulk of the American people have lost faith in Dubya's ability to manage the war. He's been in reactive mode for at least two years and we don't see signs of it changing.
What do you expect. Hes been under constant attack by the media and the Dems. Us conservatives have been telling him shite or get off the pot from the get go.
Quote:
We've come to recognize that we are no longer controlling what will happen.
When you can control what will happen the end is near and the war is won.
Quote:
The other problem is if you do ramp up now, could Dubya's Administration team make it work? They don't have my confidence, nor do they have the bulk of Americans' confidence.
Again thats the because of unrelenting attacks and his not willing to stand up to them. Hes really a wus at heart.
Quote:
As I've pointed out (and I'm now seeing others do the same), it is time for us to start planning to withdraw to force the Iraqi's to take responsibility for themselves. They have to start acting on their own. If they can't figure out how to do it in the next year, then it's a lost cause anyway.
Didnt you say you wanted us to do whats needed to win. Is giving up your way of winning? I say take the gloves off , show them were serious and send in more troops. They respect strength not weakness.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Now I understand why Thompson killed himself. I am going nuts myself just listening to this banter. You two are getting nowhere.
I'm gonna go drink tequila until I pass out, and tomorrow I will feel better than either of you. (Granted, I don't get hangovers.)
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Now I understand why Thompson killed himself. I am going nuts myself just listening to this banter. You two are getting nowhere.
Yeah me and Red are great dance partners are we not? ~:joker:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
What do you expect. Hes been under constant attack by the media and the Dems. Us conservatives have been telling him shite or get off the pot from the get go.
No you haven't, you've been backing his bogus accounts of what was needed and what was "happening."
The attempt to blame the media/democrat blame is pathetically lame. The Dems haven't had any say in things; the GOP got what they wanted. This has been the GOP show, and man have they screwed it up. The gang that couldn't shoot straight (in all its connotations.) Blaming the media for this is like watching a football coach blame the press for losing a game.
Quote:
Again thats the because of unrelenting attacks and his not willing to stand up to them. Hes really a wus at heart.
He's thumbed his nose at the media from the start. Treated them as an enemy throughout. Saying he is caving to the press is a laughable suggestion.
Quote:
Didnt you say you wanted us to do whats needed to win. Is giving up your way of winning? I say take the gloves off , show them were serious and send in more troops. They respect strength not weakness.
I didn't say to give up, I said to set a timetable for leaving and get out. I don't like deadlines, but with Dubya and crew, you have to do it if you want to force things to happen. Otherwise this twit will just draw us in deeper while still failing to establish any stability.
I'm pragmatic enough to realize that Dubya has waited too long. He can't up the troop count substantially now, he squandered that opportunity. That gives only two choices: same-old non-working plan, or Plan B--timetable for withdrawal. When you have a working plan, you stick with it, when you have a failing plan you try something else.
The Iraqi's have to take charge of their own affairs. If they can't step up and do it, then they will have to live with the consequences. Only they can determine whether or not this is a win in the end.
The other great part about leaving is that the rest of the world has to consider what to do to protect their tails if we are not there. Too many have taken pleasure in watching our trouble. It will suddenly be in their best interest to start pulling for a successful transition. Honestly, I like the idea of making *them* squirm.
EDIT: Spelling
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
No you haven't, you've been backing his bogus accounts of what was needed and what was "happening."
No I always though we werent tough enough and that Bush really didnt have the toughness thats needed here.
Quote:
The attempt to blame the media/democrat blame is pathetically lame. The Dems haven't had any say in things; the GOP got what they wanted. This has been the GOP show, and man have they screwed it up. The gang that couldn't shoot straight (in all its connotations.) Blaming the media for this is like watching a football coat blame the press for losing a game.
Only in whats reported and thats what counts. Wheres all the good news coming out of Iraq. Once more the enemy has no greater allie than people like you and the Dems. Normally when it comes to national defense your a true patriot . That is unless Bush is linked toit. Im afraid you let your hatred for him and our antagonisic relationship get in the way of reason sometimes. The US cutting and running would be one of the greatest disaters in our nations history and make the slaughter that happened after we left Nam look like a picnic.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Excellent response, Red Harvest, I could not agree with you more.
The part about "the gang that couldn't shoot straight" had me on the floor - rofl, 'bout wet myself laughing (am almost that old).
It has been hard for many 'nam vets to give up on lost causes - since they served in one. Imagine, your fathers are heroes for WWII (and Korea, sorta) and you are the first generation to lose a war for America (Korea was a draw). Tough row to hoe there - unless one realizes they were put in a no win situation to begin with. Some simply can not. Blame it on seeing to many buds lose their alls, for them to justify that they died for nothing - that Mothers wept for sons spent on the ambitions of men that cared not a twit about their boys. Be what it may, it is simply a matter of not giving up on another conflict, no matter how unwinnable it is. It is a matter of .... "they did not die invain". Point is, the men that perished in Vietnam did, that is what the wall of healing is about. It is about sacrifice without victory. It is about sacrifice for one's nation, even when those in power are wrong and unwilling to stop the killing of their friends. It is about patriotism, not wrapping the flag around one and proclaiming "we gotta stays the path", but, going forward even when one is suspect of the cause; simply because it is being asked of them by their nation.
None of these things I have mentioned are understood by Bush43 and his chickenhawk (hemroid suffering) compradres.
Gawain, at some point I hope (honestly compadre) that you can reconcile the events that shaped you in 'nam with the reality of what it was. And, what supporting our fubar in Iraq is. When I finally realized all my buds that died in 'nam was for not .... (late 1969) I wept, first for them, then for me, then for my stupidity in believing it (and again for them - though, it is a good thing dying and believing it has purpose .... even if you are screaming for your mommy to come fix the scratch that kills you).
Bush's advisors need to go away. He needs fresh ideas on how to handle our withdrawal - which I understand he (someone in his administration, probably Chenney) has already asked the pentagon to create a plan for. Thing is, we don't need to lose another 2,000+ boys and girls to prove anything. What we need to do, is begin the real war on terror - not feed it.
We need a plan for withdrawal. NOW! please.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
When I finally realized all my buds that died in 'nam was for not .... (late 1969) I wept, first for them, then for me, then for my stupidity in believing it (and again for them - though, it is a good thing dying and believing it has purpose .... even if you are screaming for your mommy to come fix the scratch that kills you).
Heres where we part. I blame the spinless here for our loss and I will again if it happens. You know as well as I that soldiers like you and I sure didnt loose that war mate. The only ones who can defeat America are Americans.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Is it a lack of spine to deny support to a bad plan?
I think not, I think most Americans love a winner, and would support a realistic and achievable plan. They won't tolerate incompetence.
Most Americans were willing to support the current effort, the reason they are shifting now isn't cowardice or stupidity or a lack of patriotism, its cause they see that the leadership isn't desving of their support.
I know I am glad that a brutal dictator has been overthrown, and I'd like nothing more than to see peace and stability and democracy in the Middle East. That is not a logical outcome of the current venture, so I say either fix it or get out. That's what Murtha has been saying. Its what a lot of people said in the late 60's about Vietnam, and when we failed to correcto ur mistakes anti-war sentiment grew until it overwhelmed the guv's capacity to endeavor to continue the war.
ichi:bow:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
I think not, I think most Americans love a winner, and would support a realistic and achievable plan. realistic and achievable plan.
We have a realistic and achievable plan.
Quote:
They won't tolerate incompetence.
.
Then how do Democrats get elected? ~D
Quote:
Most Americans were willing to support the current effort, the reason they are shifting now isn't cowardice or stupidity or a lack of patriotism, its cause they see that the leadership isn't desving of their support.
Because just like Nam all they hear night after night is how were losing.
Quote:
I know I am glad that a brutal dictator has been overthrown, and I'd like nothing more than to see peace and stability and democracy in the Middle East. That is not a logical outcome of the current venture, so I say either fix it or get out. That's what Murtha has been saying. Its what a lot of people said in the late 60's about Vietnam, and when we failed to correcto ur mistakes anti-war sentiment grew until it overwhelmed the guv's capacity to endeavor to continue the war.
As all us conservatives have been saying all along the libs would love nothing better than for this to be another Nam and return them to power. We have been proven correct. They care more about taking power than the good of America and its people. Again Im disgusted.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
We have a realistic and achievable plan.
We don't have enough men to secure the borders, we are losing the trust and support of the people (they won't turn the insurgents over to us), we don't control anything more than a handful of bases, we don't control the streets, and we are failing to get the Iraqis ready to take control. Combined with a decrease in oil production, a crazy unemployment rate, and increasing Islamic fundamentalism and tribal war, we clearly don't have anything more than a dream.
Quote:
Then how do Democrats get elected? ~D
Usually when the people get sick of the lies and abuses of the Republicans. Current events case in point.
Quote:
Because just like Nam all they hear night after night is how were losing.
Like Vietnam they hear objective reporting, not government propaganda. Westmoreland was keen on body counts and making a big deal out of taking a hill, but it was the press that kept us informed about the fact that after we killed one insurgent, another two took his place, and after we took the hill, we left it for the enemy to reclaim.
Quote:
As all us conservatives have been saying all along the libs would love nothing better than for this to be another Nam and return them to power. We have been proven correct. They care more about taking power than the good of America and its people. Again Im disgusted.
Or could it be that we have real concerns, that we care less about power and more about the truth, about our country. You're so convinced this is a power grab, when I see it as honest and objective desire to do the right thing.
I would like nothing more than for us to be succesful in Iraq, but nothing supports that hope. I would love to see democracy established and peace flourish and all those poor Iraqis find jobs and stop killing one another. I'd love to see the steam taken out of radical Islam, and for the US to have been successful. But its not happening and it doesn't appear to have a chance of happening, so some of us are being more vocal about our concerns.
In payment we get labelled as anti-American and unpatriotic and more interested in making Bush look bad no matter what it means for our country. So you're wrong about at least one of us, maybe you're wrong about a lot more. So its a direct insult and akin to me telling you that you don't care about American lives being lost, so long as Bush is proven right.
ichi
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
As all us conservatives have been saying all along the libs would love nothing better than for this to be another Nam and return them to power.
That is just insulting and infantile, in effect calling everyone who disagrees with Bush's failure a bunch of traitors.
Quote:
We have been proven correct.
No, you've been proven incompetent. Incompetent at running a war, incompetent at running a govt, incompetent at international diplomacy, and incompetent at any sort of fiscal planning. And of course, incapable of taking responsibility for your mistakes. It's all Clinton's fault I'm sure. ~:rolleyes:
Quote:
They care more about taking power than the good of America and its people. Again Im disgusted.
Funny, that's what 60% of the country is saying about those in charge right now.
This isn't about that buffoon in office. It's about cleaning up the mess. He's roadkill already. What matters now is what do we do in spite of him for the next several years.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Then you kill some more until either their all dead or they loose their will to fight. You could easily say killing japanese in WW2 increasd their will to fight. In fact didnt we enter WW2 because some of our own were killed. This is the normal human reaction. You people live in a fantasy world. If some one punches you in the nose you hit them back. According to you as soon as your hurt you should pack it in and give up. Of course killing the enemy will piss him off and make him fight harder. This is the point. Its a matter of wills. Im afraid most liberals have no backbone for this sort of thing. War insmt pretty or easy. You cannot show weakness in the face of the enemy. This is the worst thing you can do. This is exactly what the Dems do. All they care about is regaining power at any cost. They make me wanna puke.
The problem is that you don't have the strength to truly beat you're enemy and still achive your goals. Not enough boots on the ground, and/or not enough intel/population support.
You're trapped in a situation you cannot win, unless the enemy is static and continues the same way as now and dying 20 to 1. They don't, as the mosque bombs yesterday showed (if you're lucky this will help you, unlucky and the civil war will break out).
But on the other hand you cannot lose without the loss of support at home (you're correct in this), but as it is now, are you willing to endure this situation until 2020?
When would you have won in Vietnam from the limitations set up there (to prevent a possible WW3)? 1975? 1980? 1990? 2000?
Quote:
We have a realistic and achievable plan.
Care to inform us of Bush's plan?
And I agree that the US troops are the glue that keep Iraq together, but what brilliant plan does Bush got to make the American glue un-needed?
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
We don't have enough men to secure the borders, we are losing the trust and support of the people (they won't turn the insurgents over to us), we don't control anything more than a handful of bases, we don't control the streets, and we are failing to get the Iraqis ready to take control.
You see even you believe the lies.
Quote:
Like Vietnam they hear objective reporting
Objective reporting my ass.
Quote:
Or could it be that we have real concerns, that we care less about power and more about the truth, about our country
Your libertarian cover is finally blown. Its just the opposite. I havent seen a word of truth in your post yet. But I won call you a liar like many call Bush. Your just mistaken and havent got all the information.
Quote:
I would like nothing more than for us to be succesful in Iraq, but nothing supports that hope. I would love to see democracy established and peace flourish and all those poor Iraqis find jobs and stop killing one another. I'd love to see the steam taken out of radical Islam, and for the US to have been successful. But its not happening and it doesn't appear to have a chance of happening, so some of us are being more vocal about our concerns.
Again with people like you around in WW2 we would have lost. You people just dont have the stomach for a fight unless someones holding a gun to your head it seems. You better wake up soon and face reality.
Quote:
In payment we get labelled as anti-American and unpatriotic
Ill just label you naive.
Quote:
That is just insulting and infantile, in effect calling everyone who disagrees with Bush's failure a bunch of traitors.
I didnt call them traitors but I bet if Linclon were president they would be in jail.
Quote:
No, you've been proven incompetent. Incompetent at running a war, incompetent at running a govt, incompetent at international diplomacy, and incompetent at any sort of fiscal planning. And of course, incapable of taking responsibility for your mistakes. It's all Clinton's fault I'm sure
By who you?
Quote:
The problem is that you don't have the strength to truly beat you're enemy and still achive your goals. Not enough boots on the ground, and/or not enough intel/population support.
So then you fix it you dont give up.
Quote:
You're trapped in a situation you cannot win, unless the enemy is static and continues the same way as now and dying 20 to 1. They don't, as the mosque bombs yesterday showed (if you're lucky this will help you, unlucky and the civil war will break out).
Well then we should all just covert to radical Islam today before more lives are lost.
Quote:
Care to inform us of Bush's plan?
Prety simple. Stabilise Iraq to the point where their government can hold its own.
Quote:
And I agree that the US troops are the glue that keep Iraq together, but what brilliant plan does Bush got to make the American glue un-needed?
Again make the Iraqis strong enough to protect themselves.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Christ. Gawain, you sound just like those German right-wingers after WW1 who blamed the defeat on "dagger in the back", moral failure on the home front and God knows what else except bad strategy, leadership, sheer overwhelming odds or about any of the *actual* reasons.
Don't you even notice ?
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Prety simple. Stabilise Iraq to the point where their government can hold its own.
Again make the Iraqis strong enough to protect themselves.
Same plan as Vietnam, isn't it?
The first part to stabilizing it would be securing it. That never happened. Two and a half years later and it still isn't secure, NOR DOES IT SHOW ANY SIGNS OF BECOMING SO. (And you wonder why folks are down on the whole venture? Anyone with more than a dozen brain cells can see this is a problem, and one that can't just be wished away.) Investment isn't happening, unemployment is 60%. A country with that high of unemployment will not be stable. It's a catch 22 now, we can't get employment up because we can't secure the place.
So you want to blame the press? The press haven't been responsible for securing the country.
As Kafir mentioned, we keep hearing how we've "turned a corner" and now it appears that we've come full "square" to our starting point.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
You see even you believe the lies.
Sorry, mate, its you who has bought into a lie. All of the things I stated are true, and you can't come up with anything better than to insult me.
Quote:
Objective reporting my ass.
In Iraq, as in Vietnam, the press gives us much more objective info that our guv does. How about prohibiting photos of coffins? Remember Tet? We had been hearing that 'Nam was almost over, we had almost won, when they damn near destabilized us overnight.
Quote:
Your libertarian cover is finally blown. Its just the opposite. I havent seen a word of truth in your post yet. But I won call you a liar like many call Bush. Your just mistaken and havent got all the information.
Thanks for not calling me a liar. Since you want to simply bicker, I'll bite. You're the misguided one who fails to acknowledge the available info. And I'm still a libertarian~:cool:
Quote:
Again with people like you around in WW2 we would have lost. You people just dont have the stomach for a fight unless someones holding a gun to your head it seems. You better wake up soon and face reality.
I have a long history as a fighter, and won't take these baseless jabs at me lying down. Gawain, you've lost it here, attempting to bully and insult when faced with facts. This indicates to me that you have notihng else to say in this matter, no facts or real arguments, just attack and criticize and sling mud. Weak. I relish a good fight, have more stomach than you can imagine (remember I lead men into life-threatening situations every day, and well known for my ability to do so safely yet aggressively). I am facing reality, you've got your head in a bucket of sand.
Quote:
Ill just label you naive.
Yes, for thinking we could have a real debate without you making it personal.
ichi:bow:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by ichi
Is it a lack of spine to deny support to a bad plan?
No; but it was lack of spine for the Democrats to so blindly dance to Bush's tune when it came to invading Iraq on bad evidence and without a decent plan. Whatever else may have been done or said before or after the Iraq war, at this one point where many Democrat representatives should have thought for themselves they failed miserably, with few exceptions; whatever else they have to offer now is always going to be tainted by that one act of cowardice. So much for credible opposition.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
No; but it was lack of spine for the Democrats to so blindly dance to Bush's tune when it came to invading Iraq on bad evidence and without a decent plan. Whatever else may have been done or said before or after the Iraq war, at this one point where many Democrat representatives should have thought for themselves they failed miserably, with few exceptions; whatever else they have to offer now is always going to be tainted by that one act of cowardice. So much for credible opposition.
Failure to act honorably in the past should never be seen as a valid reason to fail to act honorably today.
ichi:bow:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by ichi
Failure to act honorably in the past should never be seen as a valid reason to fail to act honorably today.
ichi:bow:
Most certainly not; but failure to act honourably in the past does lead to questions about one's true intentions today, and often tends to show someone's true colours. If for instance more Democrat representatives had stood up for themselves before in an honest and consistent fashion it would have removed many doubts as to what they really want, and accusations about their credibility would be less likely to stick.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Most certainly not; but failure to act honourably in the past does lead to questions about one's true intentions today, and often tends to show someone's true colours. If for instance more Democrat representatives had stood up for themselves before in an honest and consistent fashion it would have removed many doubts as to what they really want, and accusations about their credibility would be less likely to stick.
Maybe, but we'll never know. My guess is that the radical right would be screaming "see, they never wanted us in there, now they're looking to find any excuse they can to prove they were right"
In American partisan power politics and the propoganda war you can't win, so the only thing to do is to try to keep the high ground. After 9/11 and the Bush war machines very successful war-mongering, it was almost political suicide for most politicians to oppose the war.
I'm less worried about who said what or who supported whom or any recriminations about the past, and more interested in doing the best thnig today to help get out of this mess with some sort of success
One parellel between Vietnam and Iraq that few have mentioned is the similarity between the incompetent regime we supported in Vietnam and the current approach to Iraq. The government of Iraq will be helpless in the face of civil unrest, terrorism, and militias. Remember it was American policy not to disarm the militias in Iraq, and now we have established a number of tribal warlords with no fidelity to the central guv. Recipe for disaster. We do more to restrict gun ownership in the US than we do in Iraq.
ichi:bow:
ichi
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by ichi
I'm less worried about who said what or who supported whom or any recriminations about the past, and more interested in doing the best thnig today to help get out of this mess with some sort of success.
On this, I agree completely.:bow:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Well then we should all just covert to radical Islam today before more lives are lost.
Ooohh, very wittty. ~:rolleyes:
Do you know why you cannot win? Because you got the doctrine of simply defening yourself until the enemy runs out of men to charge against your machine guns. This is due to lack of men, lack of risk-takeing and not enough winning the hearts of the people. And only a fool will lose themself against that doctrine.
You're doing D-day with 2000 men and is devoted to not losing any of them. The only way it'll work is to convince the German army to lay down their weapons or even join you. Currently the Germans don't seem to be planning on doing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Prety simple. Stabilise Iraq to the point where their government can hold its own.
Again make the Iraqis strong enough to protect themselves.
That's, that's brilliant, why didn't I think of that? ~;p
My plan of unite the world is to find out a kiss-ass political system.
As it's so superior, all democratic nations will join up and because it works better the closer nations works together it will encurage very close cooperation. Then you'll vitalize poor nations economy one by one, that to this exellent system, so that they'll join up too. The dictorships is harder, but as this point your brilliant system will be known inside those to, so with a little "push" on the opposition and giving a backdoor for the dictators (you can take care of those later) you'll get control of the dictorship too.
The point of this?
It's better thought through than the above statements as they even contains a how and not only the given statement (unite the world through a political system).
Come on Gawain, you can better than this.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Gawain, why the hell do you call Ichi, Ichi for Christ's sake, a spineless coward just because he makes more sense than you? He never insulted you once, yet you think that just because he wasn't in Vietnam, disagrees with you and merely runs into burning buildings makes him a coward?
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Gawain, why the hell do you call Ichi, Ichi for Christ's sake, a spineless coward just because he makes more sense than you
I never called him a coward. Nor would I ever. His attitude is what Im speaking of. I dont say we would loose because he was a coward I know better than that. We would loose because we as a people have lost our will to stick things out over any long period of time. If the republicans had treated FDR this what I cant imagine what would hppen. Theres only one way we can loose and thats to give up hope.
Quote:
I have a long history as a fighter, and won't take these baseless jabs at me lying down. Gawain, you've lost it here, attempting to bully and insult when faced with facts.
Again Im not calling you spineless or misquided or attempting to bully and insult you. Im saying you have a defeatest attitude like most of the libs. Things looked far worsse for us in WW2 but we didnt give up. And the republicans didnt try to undercut FDR to regain power by saying were loosing. Also you gave no facts and your statments were not correct as far as I know. From what I hear most of Iraq is fairly secure.
Quote:
You're doing D-day with 2000 men and is devoted to not losing any of them. The only way it'll work is to convince the German army to lay down their weapons or even join you. Currently the Germans don't seem to be planning on doing that.
What a ludicrous anaology.As I said then you send in more men and you never go in with the idea that your not going to loose any.
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Your libertarian cover is finally blown. Its just the opposite.
Gawain, you wouldn't know a libertarian from a camel's hump. You've been 100% modern GOP Conservative in your views. That ain't libertarian. ~:joker:
-
Re: The New ' Nam, or We seen this before
For many the arguements for supporting the Vietnam war; and then blaming the press, Liberals, and anyone that disagreed with it when it was lost - are the same ones they use today to support their misguided arguements for the occupation of Iraq (the war ended - remember the big banner "Mission Accomplished"?).
Some gibberish just never gets old, for some. Blaming the opposition for the failure of those in charge of a situation seems to be the best "plan" for the failures in Iraq that they can come up with.
Having the fortitude to "stay the Path", sounds great. Until one realizes there is no path. Until one realizes that the evidence given for the war was one sided (even fabricated), and that much of the actual intelligent information that countered those supporting arguements for the premise of war were concealed from those making the decision to go forth with it. (possibly even Bush himselg - though I doubt it)
Then we go to the "blame game" senario, or the politicization of the issue by the opposing party - while your own truebluehonestamericanconservatives are simply being fair minded and non-political in supporting their political ideals to support a bankrupt war policy. The opposition is using "politics" - ooooh is there no shame? Don't they realize how they are undermining the moral of our troops (not that 3 or 4 tours in Afghanistan or Iraq isn't doing that). Oh, those dasderdly liberal minded, politicizing, war hating, unpatriotic, traitors of democracy are ruining our perfect little war. If only they'ld be quiet about having to have a plan we could make this thing last 10 or 20 years. By walking in circles, just like we did in Vietnam.
Understand one thing - everything is political. EVERYTHING! There is no such animal as an apolitical politician. Once one understands this, then they can grasp the fact that when one side accuses the other of "playing politics", you can realize that they are infact doing the same thing. Only they believe you aren't smart enough to realize it.
The only plan the Bushys have is to continue as they have. It is that big circle scenario I mentioned a few pages back. It is the same rhetoric from 'nam, the same plan from 'nam, the same excuses for our continuing in 'nam. Only the names have changed. The ideas seem to remain the same.
