"Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah - Page 3 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 01:38 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Couldn't it be that one of the reasons the executive branch was so pro war was that prolonged, fairly simple wars USED to be a really effective way of crowd control? Keep the media busy and distracted, keep the people's attention on the valor of the troops, and while no one is looking increase the level of control for those currently in power and making the decisions. This is text book crowd control/manipulation; problem is the nation isn't as stupid as the executive branch thinks. The level of control is simply not (thank the founding fathers) there as it is in a mindless corporation. Whoops.
Shane is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 03:09 PM
430
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Vehicle: SLK32, ML430
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 11:45 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 10:40 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 5:38 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 4:47 PM

Quote:
kvining - 12/2/2005 2:29 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 1:23 PM

I ate dinner with a soldier who recently returned from fighting in Iraq (his third war). He was telling some stories about Iraq and the other wars he has been in. One of his comments is that it would be a big mistake to pull out now. It would leave things more f*ed up than ever as the first thug with enough fire power would come in and take over. He felt he needs to finish the job. This is not the first soldier I have heard this from only the most recent. He is a much more credible source for a course of action than some arm chair quarter back sitting behind his computer safe and sound in the US.
Sure, that's what we need, the military telling us all what to do, and what to think. I got news for you bud, that guy works for the people, and if the people don't want his fucking war, then tough shit for him and the rest of his war-loving pals. Hey, next time you got him on the phone, why don't you have him explain exactly HOW he is protecting me from WHAT while he stands around waiting to get shot.
First of all if you are just standing around you deserve to be shot. It is Darwin at work. Since he has made it through several wars already I doubt he is just standing around out there.

There was no discussion about the events leading up to the war, whether he agreed with going in in the first place, whether he feels lied to, etc. The discussion was an assesment of the current situation.

I do love the acusations. His war? What makes it his war? Because he is in the military or because he does not agree with you, or both. It was not his decision to start the war. He was told to go and being in the military he followed a lawful order. Yes the military works for the people. But last time the civilians ran a war we had 50k+ killed in action.

I am at a loss to understand how people can think pulling the troops out tomorrow and leaving a vaccum is a good thing and will not come back and bite us in the ass. No need to talk about how if we did not attack in the first place we would not be over there. It is a moot point. We went in, we are there. The only question is what to we do from here.
You've completely missed the point. 10 marines are now dead in an continuing of this war with as of yet, undefined objectives and no clear victory moment.

Civilian run war in vietnam...wtf are you on crack? Let me correct your history for the bajillionth time. You'll heed my advise to wiki search before you post one day, maybe...

In vietnam there was no congressional "declaration of war" like in a traditional war. It first started out with noncombatant US advisors to the south to help them train for and fight against the vietcong. That escalated into sending special forces, and then some regular troops for defense purposes (guarding the embacy, ect). When the Gulf of Tonkin happened (new facts suggest it may have never happened in the first place!!) there were only 21,000 reserves in vietnam. On August 7, 1964, the US Senate passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which gave LBJ to "as the President shall determine" what to do. The president ran the whole operation, not congress. There was no declaration of war by congress so the people are not involved. Excutive branch all the way. gg try again tomorrow.
I love how people on here try to twist others posts, make assumptions, make false and misleading statements, etc.

Who said anything about congress? Who brought up the reserves? Both of these items were brought up by you not me. I stated that the war was run by civilians.

As far as you correcting my history you have yet to ever do this. You make claims that I am wrong and you love to reference Wiki. But so far it has been you that has been consistently wrong. But if you keep repeating the same lies maybe someone will actually believe them. Typical liberal ploy use a label until you can get it to stick and damn the truth.

Here are the numbers from Vietnam.

Number Hostile/Non-Hostile American Deaths, Source: Dept of VA, 3-86

Actual %
Total Non-Hostile deaths 10,475 15.82
Total Hostile deaths 47,252 71.39
Died of their wounds 5,169 7.80
Died from illness 1,911 2.88
Died while missing 1,358 2.05
Missing returned to military control 21 .03

Number of U.S. servicemen
wounded in Vietnam 313,616


Better luck next time.

1.
You reference a conflict of 40 years ago where 50,000+ people died. So, if you're talking about Korea you can't do math. That leaves Vietnam to which I pointed out your error.
2.
You reference civilians so that would be congress correct? If not than say who the fuck you're talking about.

Let me be blunt. You've leved a charge that some civilians, whomever they may be, were in charge of a war, which you say is not vietnam(?) and resulted in 50,000 deaths. So, what civilians and what war are you bloody talking about?

If you've noticed, you're the only one who gets this kind of treatment on the board, and not just from me. Others point out your yammering as bullshit. So be clear and to the point and you won't have such problems. Post citations to your claims and we won't have problems. Good? Good.
Not sure how it can be any clearer that I am refering to Vietnam. Did you not read the entire post before you replied?

While the president is the commander in cheif he is technacally a civilian.

Post citiations for my claims? Did you not see the casuality figures I posted? Maybe they are a figment of my imagination.

My treatment here? Whatever are you refering to? I have not complained about treatment. I simply point out the twisting, falsehoods, assumptions, mistakes, etc. others make when referring to me or my posts.
430 is offline  
post #23 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 03:12 PM
430
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Vehicle: SLK32, ML430
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 11:48 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 10:54 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 5:38 PM
You've completely missed the point. 10 marines are now dead in an continuing of this war with as of yet, undefined objectives and no clear victory moment.
What is your point. Yes 10 marines were KIA today. War is hard, violent, and people die. I feel for them, their comrades, their friends, their families, their communities, etc.

So you want to make their deaths in vain by leaving now and creating a vaccum waiting to be filled and leaving the situation even more F*ed up than it is now. Resulting in many more Iraqi deaths and more instability in already volitile part of the world.
Frankly sir, I don't see how it can become more fucked up that it already is. To quote congressman Murtha from yesterday. "Oil production is lower than pre-war levels, electricity is at pre-war levels, water and sewage are at pre-war levels". Hardly sounds like success to me. If in 3 years we havn't been able to rebuild the shit we destroyed then what else can we possibly do? We do what Nixon did. We acknowledge we did the best we could and we have peace with honor. We bring the troops home and hope we did enough.
You don't have a very good imagnination if you can't imagine how it could get worse.

Here is what Liberman thinks after his most recent visit.

Lieberman 'Encouraged' by Iraq Visit By ANDREW MIGA, Associated Press Writer
Mon Nov 28, 5:19 PM ET



Sen. Joe Lieberman, fresh from a two-day visit to Iraq over the Thanksgiving holiday, said Monday he was hopeful U.S. forces could begin a "significant" withdrawal by the end of next year or in 2007.

"The country is now in reach of going from Saddam Hussein to self-government and, I'd add, self-protection," the Connecticut Democrat said in a conference call with reporters. "That would be a remarkable transformation ... I saw real progress there."

Lieberman, one of the most hawkish Democrats in the Senate, said the effectiveness of Iraqi security forces and the ability of a new Iraqi government to rule after the Dec. 15 elections are critical factors in determining when U.S. troops could come home. But if all goes well, he forsees a pullout beginning a year from now.

"If Iraqi forces continue to gain the confidence the American military sees there now ... We will be able to draw down our forces," he said.

Lieberman has visited Iraq four times in 17 months. He said there are signs life is returning to normal, including a profusion of cell phones and satellite TV dishes on rooftops.

"About two-thirds of the country is in really pretty good shape," he said, noting most attacks are in the so-called "Sunni Triangle" region. "Overall, I came back encouraged."

Lieberman said he hopes President Bush's speech Tuesday night will give a clearer picture to the American public of the progress being made in the war.

"It's time for some details," said Lieberman. "He's gotta describe some of the progress that I saw there. It's gotta be realistic."

U.S. military officials told him they hope that by next year, two-thirds of Iraq's military will be able to carry the fight to insurgents with limited logistical support from U.S. forces. Lieberman said U.S. commanders had learned from their early mistakes and were successfully pursuing a "clear-hold-build" strategy against rebel forces.

He cautioned, however, that "prematurely" pulling out U.S. forces would jeopardize the progress made thus far.

The senator said he ate three Thanksgiving meals at different bases visiting with troops, including about 50 soldiers from Connecticut.

"They look good, they're proud of what they're doing and of course they're anxious to get home, but they know they have a job to do," said Lieberman.

Lieberman wanted to personally report back to the families of the troops, but he said most of them had already sent back e-mails or telephoned home news of the meeting to friends and family in Connecticut.

The recent partisan battle in Congress over Iraq, including Pennsylvania Rep. Jack Murtha's call for an immediate troop pullout, has not significantly hurt troop morale, Lieberman added.

"As one general said, they're devoted to each other and the cause," Lieberman said.

The senator said some U.S. commanders expressed concern that some soldiers who were on their second or third deployments were suffering from stress.

430 is offline  
post #24 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 03:20 PM
430
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Vehicle: SLK32, ML430
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
JimSmith - 12/3/2005 1:22 PM
I think the biggest difference in the outlook by 430 and other Republican loyalists is they find the nebuluous, unmeasurable and unaccountable plan put forth by the President, which can be summed up by the slogan "stay the course" sufficient to maintain their support.
Nope, not a Reuplican loyalists. Although to be fair the neither the Republicans nor the Democrats of today are what they used to be.

The slogan or plan put forth (or not put forth) by the President has nothing to do with my support or feelings. This board has broken the decisions facing us concernig Iraq into Black and White "Stay the Course" or "Pull out Now". I say more needs to be done before we can pull out. I will support whatever plan I think offers the best hope for the situation regardless of who or what party offers it up.
430 is offline  
post #25 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 03:38 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

I think it is too simple and typically self serving to make the choices black and white, "cut and run" or "stay the course" so to speak. However, even in light of being confronted with a "cut and run" scenario, the President has been unable to find the means to put together an alternate plan to his slogan, which we should be able to agree is not a plan. Somehow, someone who thinks some good can come from this needs to put up a definition of what that "good" might be, and a path that can be measured and assessed for getting there. It is clear this is beyond Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeldt's ability. they have had at least two years to realize whatever their secret plan was, it is not working, and they have done nothing but chant slogans to America.

So, there might be a goal and a plan to do something other than "cut and run" that could gain support. But I don't see anything and watching fellow Americans die while we wait, lost and without a purpose in Iraq, just isn't cutting it anymore. Nothing can be worse than staying there under these conditions. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #26 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 03:53 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Ammonium
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
430 - 12/3/2005 5:09 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 11:45 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 10:40 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 5:38 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 4:47 PM

Quote:
kvining - 12/2/2005 2:29 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 1:23 PM

I ate dinner with a soldier who recently returned from fighting in Iraq (his third war). He was telling some stories about Iraq and the other wars he has been in. One of his comments is that it would be a big mistake to pull out now. It would leave things more f*ed up than ever as the first thug with enough fire power would come in and take over. He felt he needs to finish the job. This is not the first soldier I have heard this from only the most recent. He is a much more credible source for a course of action than some arm chair quarter back sitting behind his computer safe and sound in the US.
Sure, that's what we need, the military telling us all what to do, and what to think. I got news for you bud, that guy works for the people, and if the people don't want his fucking war, then tough shit for him and the rest of his war-loving pals. Hey, next time you got him on the phone, why don't you have him explain exactly HOW he is protecting me from WHAT while he stands around waiting to get shot.
First of all if you are just standing around you deserve to be shot. It is Darwin at work. Since he has made it through several wars already I doubt he is just standing around out there.

There was no discussion about the events leading up to the war, whether he agreed with going in in the first place, whether he feels lied to, etc. The discussion was an assesment of the current situation.

I do love the acusations. His war? What makes it his war? Because he is in the military or because he does not agree with you, or both. It was not his decision to start the war. He was told to go and being in the military he followed a lawful order. Yes the military works for the people. But last time the civilians ran a war we had 50k+ killed in action.

I am at a loss to understand how people can think pulling the troops out tomorrow and leaving a vaccum is a good thing and will not come back and bite us in the ass. No need to talk about how if we did not attack in the first place we would not be over there. It is a moot point. We went in, we are there. The only question is what to we do from here.
You've completely missed the point. 10 marines are now dead in an continuing of this war with as of yet, undefined objectives and no clear victory moment.

Civilian run war in vietnam...wtf are you on crack? Let me correct your history for the bajillionth time. You'll heed my advise to wiki search before you post one day, maybe...

In vietnam there was no congressional "declaration of war" like in a traditional war. It first started out with noncombatant US advisors to the south to help them train for and fight against the vietcong. That escalated into sending special forces, and then some regular troops for defense purposes (guarding the embacy, ect). When the Gulf of Tonkin happened (new facts suggest it may have never happened in the first place!!) there were only 21,000 reserves in vietnam. On August 7, 1964, the US Senate passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which gave LBJ to "as the President shall determine" what to do. The president ran the whole operation, not congress. There was no declaration of war by congress so the people are not involved. Excutive branch all the way. gg try again tomorrow.
I love how people on here try to twist others posts, make assumptions, make false and misleading statements, etc.

Who said anything about congress? Who brought up the reserves? Both of these items were brought up by you not me. I stated that the war was run by civilians.

As far as you correcting my history you have yet to ever do this. You make claims that I am wrong and you love to reference Wiki. But so far it has been you that has been consistently wrong. But if you keep repeating the same lies maybe someone will actually believe them. Typical liberal ploy use a label until you can get it to stick and damn the truth.

Here are the numbers from Vietnam.

Number Hostile/Non-Hostile American Deaths, Source: Dept of VA, 3-86

Actual %
Total Non-Hostile deaths 10,475 15.82
Total Hostile deaths 47,252 71.39
Died of their wounds 5,169 7.80
Died from illness 1,911 2.88
Died while missing 1,358 2.05
Missing returned to military control 21 .03

Number of U.S. servicemen
wounded in Vietnam 313,616


Better luck next time.

1.
You reference a conflict of 40 years ago where 50,000+ people died. So, if you're talking about Korea you can't do math. That leaves Vietnam to which I pointed out your error.
2.
You reference civilians so that would be congress correct? If not than say who the fuck you're talking about.

Let me be blunt. You've leved a charge that some civilians, whomever they may be, were in charge of a war, which you say is not vietnam(?) and resulted in 50,000 deaths. So, what civilians and what war are you bloody talking about?

If you've noticed, you're the only one who gets this kind of treatment on the board, and not just from me. Others point out your yammering as bullshit. So be clear and to the point and you won't have such problems. Post citations to your claims and we won't have problems. Good? Good.
Not sure how it can be any clearer that I am refering to Vietnam. Did you not read the entire post before you replied?

While the president is the commander in cheif he is technacally a civilian.

Post citiations for my claims? Did you not see the casuality figures I posted? Maybe they are a figment of my imagination.

My treatment here? Whatever are you refering to? I have not complained about treatment. I simply point out the twisting, falsehoods, assumptions, mistakes, etc. others make when referring to me or my posts.
Alright, now we're getting somewhere. So, you ment the president as a civilian and that the president running the vietnam war was bad. Then, if we use your logic, wouldn't the current war being run by the president be bad too?
Ammonium is offline  
post #27 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 04:00 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Shabah's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2004
Vehicle: 300c (1956)
Location: 19 05'40.0 N, 49 49'09 E
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
JimSmith - 12/3/2005 5:38 PM

I think it is too simple and typically self serving to make the choices black and white, "cut and run" or "stay the course" so to speak. However, even in light of being confronted with a "cut and run" scenario, the President has been unable to find the means to put together an alternate plan to his slogan, which we should be able to agree is not a plan. Somehow, someone who thinks some good can come from this needs to put up a definition of what that "good" might be, and a path that can be measured and assessed for getting there. It is clear this is beyond Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeldt's ability. they have had at least two years to realize whatever their secret plan was, it is not working, and they have done nothing but chant slogans to America.

So, there might be a goal and a plan to do something other than "cut and run" that could gain support. But I don't see anything and watching fellow Americans die while we wait, lost and without a purpose in Iraq, just isn't cutting it anymore. Nothing can be worse than staying there under these conditions. Jim
I got an idea. Why not give it the Israeli to take care of it? It's in their neighborhood, they are the "only democracy" in the region, they have WMD and sophisticated weapons that they can use on unruly insurgents coupled with the "best" intelligence service in the world and this war was in part supposed to have been for Israel’s protection… How about seeing all those billions of dollars donated to Israel for once put to work to give back to the United States? This might be the ticket if someone has the courage to even bring it up in the US’s politically correct policy making…

Shabah is offline  
post #28 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 04:05 PM
430
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Vehicle: SLK32, ML430
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,349
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/3/2005 5:53 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/3/2005 5:09 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 11:45 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 10:40 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 12/2/2005 5:38 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 4:47 PM

Quote:
kvining - 12/2/2005 2:29 PM

Quote:
430 - 12/2/2005 1:23 PM

I ate dinner with a soldier who recently returned from fighting in Iraq (his third war). He was telling some stories about Iraq and the other wars he has been in. One of his comments is that it would be a big mistake to pull out now. It would leave things more f*ed up than ever as the first thug with enough fire power would come in and take over. He felt he needs to finish the job. This is not the first soldier I have heard this from only the most recent. He is a much more credible source for a course of action than some arm chair quarter back sitting behind his computer safe and sound in the US.
Sure, that's what we need, the military telling us all what to do, and what to think. I got news for you bud, that guy works for the people, and if the people don't want his fucking war, then tough shit for him and the rest of his war-loving pals. Hey, next time you got him on the phone, why don't you have him explain exactly HOW he is protecting me from WHAT while he stands around waiting to get shot.
First of all if you are just standing around you deserve to be shot. It is Darwin at work. Since he has made it through several wars already I doubt he is just standing around out there.

There was no discussion about the events leading up to the war, whether he agreed with going in in the first place, whether he feels lied to, etc. The discussion was an assesment of the current situation.

I do love the acusations. His war? What makes it his war? Because he is in the military or because he does not agree with you, or both. It was not his decision to start the war. He was told to go and being in the military he followed a lawful order. Yes the military works for the people. But last time the civilians ran a war we had 50k+ killed in action.

I am at a loss to understand how people can think pulling the troops out tomorrow and leaving a vaccum is a good thing and will not come back and bite us in the ass. No need to talk about how if we did not attack in the first place we would not be over there. It is a moot point. We went in, we are there. The only question is what to we do from here.
You've completely missed the point. 10 marines are now dead in an continuing of this war with as of yet, undefined objectives and no clear victory moment.

Civilian run war in vietnam...wtf are you on crack? Let me correct your history for the bajillionth time. You'll heed my advise to wiki search before you post one day, maybe...

In vietnam there was no congressional "declaration of war" like in a traditional war. It first started out with noncombatant US advisors to the south to help them train for and fight against the vietcong. That escalated into sending special forces, and then some regular troops for defense purposes (guarding the embacy, ect). When the Gulf of Tonkin happened (new facts suggest it may have never happened in the first place!!) there were only 21,000 reserves in vietnam. On August 7, 1964, the US Senate passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which gave LBJ to "as the President shall determine" what to do. The president ran the whole operation, not congress. There was no declaration of war by congress so the people are not involved. Excutive branch all the way. gg try again tomorrow.
I love how people on here try to twist others posts, make assumptions, make false and misleading statements, etc.

Who said anything about congress? Who brought up the reserves? Both of these items were brought up by you not me. I stated that the war was run by civilians.

As far as you correcting my history you have yet to ever do this. You make claims that I am wrong and you love to reference Wiki. But so far it has been you that has been consistently wrong. But if you keep repeating the same lies maybe someone will actually believe them. Typical liberal ploy use a label until you can get it to stick and damn the truth.

Here are the numbers from Vietnam.

Number Hostile/Non-Hostile American Deaths, Source: Dept of VA, 3-86

Actual %
Total Non-Hostile deaths 10,475 15.82
Total Hostile deaths 47,252 71.39
Died of their wounds 5,169 7.80
Died from illness 1,911 2.88
Died while missing 1,358 2.05
Missing returned to military control 21 .03

Number of U.S. servicemen
wounded in Vietnam 313,616


Better luck next time.

1.
You reference a conflict of 40 years ago where 50,000+ people died. So, if you're talking about Korea you can't do math. That leaves Vietnam to which I pointed out your error.
2.
You reference civilians so that would be congress correct? If not than say who the fuck you're talking about.

Let me be blunt. You've leved a charge that some civilians, whomever they may be, were in charge of a war, which you say is not vietnam(?) and resulted in 50,000 deaths. So, what civilians and what war are you bloody talking about?

If you've noticed, you're the only one who gets this kind of treatment on the board, and not just from me. Others point out your yammering as bullshit. So be clear and to the point and you won't have such problems. Post citations to your claims and we won't have problems. Good? Good.
Not sure how it can be any clearer that I am refering to Vietnam. Did you not read the entire post before you replied?

While the president is the commander in cheif he is technacally a civilian.

Post citiations for my claims? Did you not see the casuality figures I posted? Maybe they are a figment of my imagination.

My treatment here? Whatever are you refering to? I have not complained about treatment. I simply point out the twisting, falsehoods, assumptions, mistakes, etc. others make when referring to me or my posts.
Alright, now we're getting somewhere. So, you ment the president as a civilian and that the president running the vietnam war was bad. Then, if we use your logic, wouldn't the current war being run by the president be bad too?
As far as I know GW is not picking targets and deciding tactical decisions on a daily basis like was done in VietNam. To answer your question if the president was the one selecting the daily targets for what is to be attacked and over riding the generals on what to/not attach (not decisions like bombing targets in Syria but selecting this mud hut vs. that truck) then yes it would be a very bad thing.
430 is offline  
post #29 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 04:13 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Quote:
Shabah - 12/3/2005 6:00 PM

Quote:
JimSmith - 12/3/2005 5:38 PM

I think it is too simple and typically self serving to make the choices black and white, "cut and run" or "stay the course" so to speak. However, even in light of being confronted with a "cut and run" scenario, the President has been unable to find the means to put together an alternate plan to his slogan, which we should be able to agree is not a plan. Somehow, someone who thinks some good can come from this needs to put up a definition of what that "good" might be, and a path that can be measured and assessed for getting there. It is clear this is beyond Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeldt's ability. they have had at least two years to realize whatever their secret plan was, it is not working, and they have done nothing but chant slogans to America.

So, there might be a goal and a plan to do something other than "cut and run" that could gain support. But I don't see anything and watching fellow Americans die while we wait, lost and without a purpose in Iraq, just isn't cutting it anymore. Nothing can be worse than staying there under these conditions. Jim
I got an idea. Why not give it the Israeli to take care of it? It's in their neighborhood, they are the "only democracy" in the region, they have WMD and sophisticated weapons that they can use on unruly insurgents coupled with the "best" intelligence service in the world and this war was in part supposed to have been for Israel’s protection… How about seeing all those billions of dollars donated to Israel for once put to work to give back to the United States? This might be the ticket if someone has the courage to even bring it up in the US’s politically correct policy making…
The biggest issue I have with that plan is, when Israel shows any sign of faltering, we wil be back. And, your plan puts a confrontation between the rest of the Arab world and Israel on the playlist at the Mideast Theater of Operations, virtually guaranteeing an American presence for ever, unless we "cut and run" on the Israelis, which is not likely. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #30 of 42 (permalink) Old 12-03-2005, 04:15 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Shabah's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2004
Vehicle: 300c (1956)
Location: 19 05'40.0 N, 49 49'09 E
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: "Stay the course": Ten Marines killed in bombing in supposedly conquered Fallujah

Here is what's being explored: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/03/wirq03.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/03/ixworld.html

Ah running out off ideas is a halmak of this administration... It will be interesting what my grand children will be reading in history books in the future. That is if they have a future...
Shabah is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome