Incredable...

[Nords]

You probably totally disagree with my opinions and you are wrong.

Let's keep it civil. Remember: "Hey, this is the War Room. You can't fight in here!"

We're not arguing the goal, only its implementation.

 

[PsyopRanger]

Yeah and the tanks and aircraft carriers and B52s and ICBMs are just for show, right?

If you look at current military doctrine and the past 10 years of conflicts. Intial conflict is minimal and the main tasks are:

Stability Operations
Peace Operations

 

[brewer12345]

If you look at current military doctrine and the past 10 years of conflicts.  Intial conflict is minimal and the main tasks are:

Stability Operations
Peace Operations

That's been working out real well lately, I understand.

FWIW, I've little doubt that there is nobody that wants to see peace in Iraq more than the US soldiers who are serving there (well, maybe nobody other than the Iraqis). But to suggest that the whole point of military action is peace is pretty, well, lets say disingenuous.

 

[REWahoo]

Nords your "Hey, don't shoot the messengers" post is one of the best things I've seen on the forum, and I'm embarassed to say that I've read almost every last one of the 160,000 messages here. As a former cold warrior, I could not agree more.

"Let him who desires peace prepare for war."

 

[brewer12345]

"Let him who desires peace prepare for war."

And he will only get war. Big militaries standing around are just irresistable toys for most politicians. Its like leaving Mad Dog around the house when living with an alcoholic.

 

[jclarksnakes]

Nords,
....I did keep it civil. And it still is. Brewer and I agree that it is okay to disagree.
jc

 

[Nords]

Nords your "Hey, don't shoot the messengers" post is one of the best things I've seen on the forum, and I'm embarassed to say that I've read almost every last one of the 160,000 messages here.  As a former cold warrior, I could not agree more.

Thanks.  But I'd rather be out of a job and on Brewer's side...

"Let him who desires peace prepare for war."

West Point, keeping the classics alive, has taught my nephew the Army Ranger a slightly different version:  
"Peace through superior firepower."

Big militaries standing around are just irresistable toys for most politicians.  Its like leaving Mad Dog around the house when living with an alcoholic.

Pretty ironic considering how few of them are veterans.  At least an alcoholic understands what he's getting into, whether or not he can abstain. 

GWB's ANG muster sheets notwithstanding, maybe members of government should only be able to proclaim military decisions or vote on war issues if they've served-- or if they have a family member in the service.

Geez, I guess I should start taking that personally.  The USNA Blue & Gold Officer is making a special visit to our kid's high school next week, and right now our kid would pay money to talk to a real live BGO.

 

[bow-tie]

..GWB's ANG muster sheets notwithstanding, maybe members of government should only be able to proclaim military decisions or vote on war issues if they've served-- or if they have a family member in the service...

I think that's a very good idea... to have some skin in the game. Methinks it gives a little clearer perspective.

 

[REWahoo]

Better yet, just leave it to the generals. Although that's certainly not a new idea...

"...do you recall what Clemenceau once said about war? He said war was too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, fifty years ago, he might have been right. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought.

...do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream? Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream? You know when fluoridation first began? Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core commie works.

I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

---Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper to Group Captain Lionel Mandrake, "Dr. Strangelove"

 

[PsyopRanger]

That's been working out real well lately, I understand.

FWIW, I've little doubt that there is nobody that wants to see peace in Iraq more than the US soldiers who are serving there (well, maybe nobody other than the Iraqis). But to suggest that the whole point of military action is peace is pretty, well, lets say disingenuous.

This is the change we face. For years the military focused on large scale cold war operations despite many warnings as far back as the 1960's of the coming low intensity conflict, guerilla wars and terrorism.

Although many detest Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfield they are the first administration to try to change this policy and deal with the current issues of terrorism, nation building, and peace keeping.

As to your comment about the whole point of military action is peace, know one ever said that? Military conflict today is short “war” engagements followed by long periods of nation building, peace keeping, and stability operations.

This is what is happening is Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.

I believe the whole reason for a military is national defense, however, with terrorism there also has to be offensive action to counter the threat.

The passive Clinton Administration approach to Terrorism, Al Qaeda’s threats and terrorists attacks led to the largest terrorist attack on American soil in US history.

I also wonder why we continue to point the finger towards the government and military when terrorists and radical Islam are to blame?

Until we deal with the root of the problem, it will never go away.

 

[brewer12345]

The passive Clinton Administration approach to Terrorism, Al Qaeda’s threats and terrorists attacks lead to the largest terrorist attack on American soil in US history.

Bullshit, pure and simple.

Clinton did a LOT to try to stamp out al Qaeda, but it didnt include invading another country so nobody thinks he did anything. As I understand it, the intelligence community and the outgoing Clinton administration tried pretty hard to underscore the terrorist threat to our current "leaders", but they were laughed at. So we are pissing away untold billions on a war that will never end and will never accomplish anything other than getting more people to hate us.

 

[eridanus]

Clinton did a LOT to try to stamp out al Qaeda, but it didnt include invading another country so nobody thinks he did anything.

It's difficult, and probably futile, to fight a stateless enemy with an army trained to fight a state.

 

[brewer12345]

It's difficult, and probably futile, to fight a stateless enemy with an army trained to fight a state.

Tell that to the republican party basher hacks... but don't be surprised if you get a visit rom some large men.

 

[PsyopRanger]

Bull****, pure and simple.

Clinton did a LOT to try to stamp out al Qaeda, but it didnt include invading another country so nobody thinks he did anything. As I understand it, the intelligence community and the outgoing Clinton administration tried pretty hard to underscore the terrorist threat to our current "leaders", but they were laughed at. So we are pissing away untold billions on a war that will never end and will never accomplish anything other than getting more people to hate us.

Yeah, he stamped it out all right....

President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as 2000.

I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.

The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.

http://www.infowars.com/saved pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

 

[PsyopRanger]

You can also argue that Reagan armed them in the 80's when we were fighting the Soviets.

 

[brewer12345]

President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as 2000.

Oh yes, an offer to extradite him to Saudi Arabia, very credible. "Please don't throw me in that briar patch!"

Please. You'll have to do better than that. And in any case, it doesn't change the fact that a large scale invasion of a country that had NOTHING to do with OBL/al Qaeda was very counter-productive in terms of stamping out terrorism.

And yes, we did arm the nutballs in Afghan. We also gave Saddam weapons (chemical ones, I believe) and we were filled with onscene glee when he duked it out with the Iranians. Doesn't really change the hideous stupidity of the last 6 years, though.

I swear, sometimes I just wish I could wake up and realize that all of this mess was just a bad dream.

 

[REWahoo]

Tell that to the republican party basher hacks... but don't be surprised if you get a visit rom some large men.

'Cmon brewer. Don't be giving lazygood4nothinbum any ideas now...

 

[PsyopRanger]

”The Clinton administration talked about firm evidence linking Saddam Hussein's regime to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network years before President Bush made the same statements….

One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan….

In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm

I offer you to watch the documentary “Voices of Iraq” it was recorded by actual Iraqi’s who speak about Saddam, Saddam’s support for terrorist, etc.

I find it funny. I have a Top Secret- SCI clearance and have been to Iraq 3 times and yet people who have never stepped foot in Iraq or talked with Iraqi’s and watch US news know all the facts and classified dealings of their government?

 

[brewer12345]

Yup, Clinton bombed something in the Sudan. Note that he didn't lie to the US public and the United Nations and then invade on a flimsy pretext.

Saddam hated the terrorists because he was a dictator and they potentially threatened his grip on Iraq. Was he a nice guy or anything other than a despot? Nope, but you don't see us invading any of the other countries run by ruthless dictators, now do you?

But we will never agree, so we might as well go our separate ways on this one.

 

[PsyopRanger]

Ah Hell Brewer, we could argue all day about who did this and who did that.

The fact is we don’t make policy.

I respect your opinions and views.

I concede from the debate, it is not productive.

Back to talk on FIRE..

 

[spark0506]

I swear, sometimes I just wish I could wake up and realize that all of this mess was just a bad dream.

I can sure agree with you on that comment. Sometimes it feels like a very bad dream.

 

[Dreamer]

Who better to bump up to first class than a soldier returning from Iraq who has been flying for 20 hours and wants to see his newborn. How sad that the gate attendant does not have any more compassion than that.

 

[jclarksnakes]

....Flying first class? Who needs it? It just seems like more of that conspicuous consumption, keeping up with the Joneses crap that is totally pointless. I would actually be embarrassed to sit in first class thinking all those people going by on their way to steerage knew I was totally stupid for wasting good money to get a little more elbow room on a two hour flight. Some things in life are important. Riding first class ain't one of them. BTW, have you noticed how many of the people riding first class these days are enormously obese or get drunkenly loud and abusive? Me thinks it is more pleasant to ride in the back with the sober skinny people.
jc

 

[mickj]

....Flying first class? Who needs it? It just seems like more of that conspicuous consumption, keeping up with the Joneses crap that is totally pointless. I would actually be embarrassed to sit in first class thinking all those people going by on their way to steerage knew I was totally stupid for wasting good money to get a little more elbow room on a two hour flight. Some things in life are important. Riding first class ain't one of them. BTW, have you noticed how many of the people riding first class these days are enormously obese or get drunkenly loud and abusive? Me thinks it is more pleasant to ride in the back with the sober skinny people.
jc

Most people who fly first class don't pay for it, they get it for free with upgrades. Having said that though... I felt very uncomfortable sitting in first class as everyone else filed past me.

 

[youbet]

BTW, have you noticed how many of the people riding first class these days are enormously obese or get drunkenly loud and abusive? Me thinks it is more pleasant to ride in the back with the sober skinny people.

No, I haven't noticed that tendency. I've never been in first class, but always rode in business class on international flights to Asia and Europe during my working years.  Never, not once, did I have an issue with obese or drunkenly loud and abusive people on those flights.  Perhaps your experience was not the norm?  Only cost would influence me to ride coach on those long flights in the future.  No issues with my neighbors whatsoever.