Admirals and Generals Threaten to Quit if Shrub attacks Iran

[Psychoblues]

As the World turns, young shrub can’t get no satisfaction.


Some of America's most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defense and intelligence sources.

Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learned that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

"There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran," a source with close ties to British intelligence said. "There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible."

(snip)

A generals' revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. "American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired," said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defense secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.

More: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece

It is a shame that the lil’ shit couldn’t get a little more time in the War College during his short and unremarkable time in the Texas Air National Guard.

[stephanie]

Ah yes....

All those UnNamed generals and admirals in that article are going to hold their breath and stomp their feet....

Way to go...

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/alaskamomma/thtantrumgr7.gif

:poke:

[darin]

Why do people buy INTO this bs, Stephanie? Why do you think Psycho believes this crap? People can be weak-minded,

[CSM]

It is a shame that the lil’ shit couldn’t get a little more time in the War College during his short and unremarkable time in the Texas Air National Guard.

Yeah, he should have gone here while you were an instructor there right?

[Gunny]

As the World turns, young shrub can’t get no satisfaction.


Some of America's most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defense and intelligence sources.

Tension in the Gulf region has raised fears that an attack on Iran is becoming increasingly likely before President George Bush leaves office. The Sunday Times has learned that up to five generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack.

"There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran," a source with close ties to British intelligence said. "There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible."

(snip)

A generals' revolt on such a scale would be unprecedented. "American generals usually stay and fight until they get fired," said a Pentagon source. Robert Gates, the defense secretary, has repeatedly warned against striking Iran and is believed to represent the view of his senior commanders.

More: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece

It is a shame that the lil’ shit couldn’t get a little more time in the War College during his short and unremarkable time in the Texas Air National Guard.

Let the pussies resign. It isn't like there are just as qualified individuals waiting in the wings for them to free up the slots anyway.

[manu1959]

"There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran," a source with close ties to British intelligence said. "There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible."

hey look...............british intelligence is suddenly reliable again..........

[Gunny]

"There are four or five generals and admirals we know of who would resign if Bush ordered an attack on Iran," a source with close ties to British intelligence said. "There is simply no stomach for it in the Pentagon, and a lot of people question whether such an attack would be effective or even possible."

hey look...............british intelligence is suddenly reliable again..........

...from one post to the next.:laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Let the pussies resign. It isn't like there are just as qualified individuals waiting in the wings for them to free up the slots anyway.

I completely agree. The Commander-in-Chief of the Military is the President of the United States, not some unnamed generals. If they don't like the Presidents decisions, they can resign (although I think they should be court martialed. After all if a private refused an order from his commanding officer, he would be, why should those at the top who refuse an order from their commanding officer be allowed to 'resign' when they dont like the order?).

[manu1959]

I completely agree. The Commander-in-Chief of the Military is the President of the United States, not some unnamed generals. If they don't like the Presidents decisions, they can resign (although I think they should be court martialed. After all if a private refused an order from his commanding officer, he would be, why should those at the top who refuse an order from their commanding officer be allowed to 'resign' when they dont like the order?).

rank has its privilege

[avatar4321]

rank has its privilege

Perhaps, but it should also teach you to know better.

[manu1959]

Perhaps, but it should also teach you to know better.

yes it should.....

[Gunny]

I completely agree. The Commander-in-Chief of the Military is the President of the United States, not some unnamed generals. If they don't like the Presidents decisions, they can resign (although I think they should be court martialed. After all if a private refused an order from his commanding officer, he would be, why should those at the top who refuse an order from their commanding officer be allowed to 'resign' when they dont like the order?).

I really didn't see anything about refusing an order. It says they're threatening to resign in protest. If it was a SgtMaj (E-9), he would be allowed to retire.

I also believe the President/Service Secretary has the right to deny the request. Not 100% sure how it works with officers. I also believe they can be charged and tried if they actually refuse to obey an order. I think the last time it came to that was MacArthur (publicly denouncing Truman's policy in regard to China). He wasn't charged, but was relieved of his command and forced to retire.

I retired at 20 with 2 years remaining on my contract. Once you are retirement eligible, you can reuqest it.

[Sitarro]

I think the biggest mistake of the Bush Administration is obvious.....President Bush didn't fire Karl Rove and appoint Psychoblues as his chief consultant.

[avatar4321]

I think the biggest mistake of the Bush Administration is obvious.....President Bush didn't fire Karl Rove and appoint Psychoblues as his chief consultant.

Maybe Psycho is Rove... He is just trying to get support for his positions by making those who oppose them look like raving lunatics.

[Gunny]

Maybe Psycho is Rove... He is just trying to get support for his positions by making those who oppose them look like raving lunatics.

I think Psycho is Al Franken.

[CSM]

I think Psycho is Al Franken.

I think Psycho is actually John Kerry...they both sound alike and ....oooo.... do the lies ever seem similar!

[Gunny]

I think Psycho is actually John Kerry...they both sound alike and ....oooo.... do the lies ever seem similar!

You mean like sitting illegally in Cambodia on Christmas Eve listening to the President give a speech on the radio a month before he was sworn in? Not to mention breaking radio silence while being illegally in a hostile country.

[Psychoblues]

Lemme clear this up for you, avatar4321. Enlisted troops are enlisted for a particular period of time while the officers are entitled to resign at will. Got it? Maybe someday but probably not today. Correct?



I completely agree. The Commander-in-Chief of the Military is the President of the United States, not some unnamed generals. If they don't like the Presidents decisions, they can resign (although I think they should be court martialed. After all if a private refused an order from his commanding officer, he would be, why should those at the top who refuse an order from their commanding officer be allowed to 'resign' when they dont like the order?).

The CIC is abusing his unearned power and Americans, including Admirals and Generals, are pissed about it. As Forrest Gump says about what his mother told him, "Stupid is as stupid does." Do you have an argument with that analogy?

[avatar4321]

Lemme clear this up for you, avatar4321. Enlisted troops are enlisted for a particular period of time while the officers are entitled to resign at will. Got it? Maybe someday but probably not today. Correct?




The CIC is abusing his unearned power and Americans, including Admirals and Generals, are pissed about it. As Forrest Gump says about what his mother told him, "Stupid is as stupid does." Do you have an argument with that analogy?

Im aware that they can resign at will. I simply said it seems rather unfair that those lower in command would be court martialed for disobedience when those higher in command wouldnt. And I don't care where in the military is, you shouldnt be badmouthing the Commander In Chief in public, even anonymously. If you disagree, retire. Great. Someone willing to do what it takes to protect the Constitution will be appointed.

As your baseless accusation of unearned power. the President has that power inherently. If you dont understand that I suggest you read the Constitution of the United States.

[Gunny]

Lemme clear this up for you, avatar4321. Enlisted troops are enlisted for a particular period of time while the officers are entitled to resign at will. Got it? Maybe someday but probably not today. Correct?




The CIC is abusing his unearned power and Americans, including Admirals and Generals, are pissed about it. As Forrest Gump says about what his mother told him, "Stupid is as stupid does." Do you have an argument with that analogy?

Let me clear this up for YOU. In your neg-rep you wrote, and I quote you: "You are just wrong."

You stand corrected.


On the floor of the Senate on March 27, 1986, Sen. John Kerry issued this statement: "I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared — seared — in me."
Mr. Kerry's statement at the time was similar to other statements he had made after returning from duty in Vietnam, and throughout much of the 1970s. Writing for the Boston Herald in October 1979, Mr. Kerry said this: "I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real."

First, the obvious: Richard Nixon was not president in December 1968, and no history of the Vietnam era suggests that Lyndon Johnson ever ordered troops into Cambodia; but those are minor points. A new book, "Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry," by John O'Neill and Jerome R. Corsi, argues that Mr. Kerry was never in Cambodia, during Christmas 1968 or otherwise. To support their allegation, Messrs. O'Neill and Corsi highlight the denials of all living commanders in Mr. Kerry's chain of command that Mr. Kerry was in Cambodia, or was ever ordered into Cambodia (Joe Streuhli, commander of Coastal Division 13; George Elliott, commander of Coastal Division 11; Adrian Lonsdale, captain, Coast Guard, commander, Coastal Surveillance Center at An Thoi; Rear Adm. Ray Hoffman, commander Coastal Surveillance Force Vietnam; and Rear Adm. Art Price, commander of River Patrol Force). Also, the authors report that three out of Mr. Kerry's five-man Swift boat crew deny that they or their boat was in Cambodia during Christmas 1968 — the other two refused to comment.
According to the book, Mr. Kerry and his Swift boat crew were stationed at Coastal Division 13 in Cat Lo, with a patrol area extending to Sa Dec, which was a little more than 50 miles from the Cambodian border. Tom Anderson, the commander of River Division 531, who was in charge of the patrol boats canvassing the waterways from Sa Dec to the Cambodian border, confirmed to the authors that no Swift boats were anywhere in the area, and that any would have been stopped, or their captains court-martialed for breaching the border.
In 1992, The Associated Press interviewed Mr. Kerry about his Vietnam experience. Again, the Cambodian story resurfaced: "By Christmas 1968, part of Kerry's patrol extended across the border of South Vietnam into Cambodia. 'We were told, "Just go up there and do your patrol." Everybody was over there (in Cambodia). Nobody thought twice about it,' Kerry said." Then, in a Boston Globe report from last summer, Mr. Kerry slightly changed his Cambodia story: "To top it off, Kerry said, he had gone several miles inside Cambodia, which theoretically was off limits." If it was "theoretically off limits," who gave Mr. Kerry the order to enter Cambodia, as he asserted numerous times before? Yet in "Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War," author Douglas Brinkley provides a thoroughly different version of what happened in Christmas 1968. According to Mr. Brinkley, who received his information from Mr. Kerry directly, Mr. Kerry was on patrol in Sa Dec (50 miles from the Cambodian border) on Christmas Eve and spent Christmas day writing journal entries back at his base.

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040809-090612-9480r.htm

Here's another:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27211-2004Aug23.html

And here's another:


John Kerry took the floor of the United States Senate on March 27, 1986, and delivered a dramatic oration indicting the foreign policy of the Reagan Administration. As is his habit, Kerry drew on his Vietnam war experience in explaining his opposition to the policy.

"I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia," he said. "I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and having the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there."

To emphasize the importance of this incident to his subsequent political development, Kerry asserted: "I have that memory which is seared—seared —in me, that says to me, before we send another generation into harm's way we have a responsibility in the U.S. Senate to go the last step, to make the best effort possible to avoid that kind of conflict."

The story of his 1968 Christmas in Cambodia is one that Kerry has told on many occasions over the years. He invoked the story in 1979 in the course of his review of the movie "Apocalypse Now" for the Boston Herald. Most recently, Kerry told the story—with remarkable embellishments involving a CIA man who gave him his "lucky hat"—last year on separate occasions to reporters Laura Blumenfeld of the Washington Post and Michael Kranish of the Boston Globe.

Certain elements of Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia story were incredible on their face. Kerry attributed responsibility for his illegal 1968 mission to Richard Nixon, despite the fact that Lyndon Johnson was president at the time. The Khmer Rouge who allegedly shot at Kerry during his "secret" mission did not take the field until 1972.

Moreover, there is no record that Swift boats—the type of boat under Kerry's command—were ever used for secret missions in Cambodia. Their size and noise make them unlikely candidates for such missions in any event. Indeed, the authorized biographer of Kerry's Vietnam service—historian Douglas Brinkley in his book Tour of Duty—omits any mention of such a covert cross-border mission to Cambodia at any time during Kerry's service.

Over the past few weeks, the Christmas in Cambodia tale, a keystone of John Kerry's Vietnam autobiography, has been revealed to be fraudulent. On Christmas 1968, Kerry was docked at Sa Dec, 50 miles from Cambodia in an area from which the Cambodian border was in fact inaccessible.

http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.356/pub_detail.asp

So, back up your mouth or suck aigs, dipshit. Kerry's as big a fraud as you.

[Gunny]

Lemme clear this up for you, avatar4321. Enlisted troops are enlisted for a particular period of time while the officers are entitled to resign at will. Got it? Maybe someday but probably not today. Correct?

Let me clear this up for you, psycho .... officers are NOT allowed to resign at will until after they have served their initial commitment to the US military; which, is eight years, the same as enlisted.

Their resignations can be refused. It is a request, not an entitlement.



The CIC is abusing his unearned power and Americans, including Admirals and Generals, are pissed about it. As Forrest Gump says about what his mother told him, "Stupid is as stupid does." Do you have an argument with that analogy?

I don't. I get it pretty easily. You and Forrest Gump have the same IQ.

Please present to the members of this board, your argument, backed by verifiable, unbiased fact that the CinC (for a vet, you sure don't see to know your military acronyms) is abusing power, and which powers he possesses that are "unearned."

[Gunny]

Im aware that they can resign at will. I simply said it seems rather unfair that those lower in command would be court martialed for disobedience when those higher in command wouldnt. And I don't care where in the military is, you shouldnt be badmouthing the Commander In Chief in public, even anonymously. If you disagree, retire. Great. Someone willing to do what it takes to protect the Constitution will be appointed.

As your baseless accusation of unearned power. the President has that power inherently. If you dont understand that I suggest you read the Constitution of the United States.

Avatar ...

Psycho doesn't know what he's talking about.

As I posted in response to his ignorance, officers can only request their resignation be accepted, and only after they serve the same initial period of commitment that enlisted serve.

Tendering a resignation is NOT disobeying an order. If an officer refuses to obey a lawfully-given order by a senior officer, that officer CAN be charged with failure to obey a lawfully given order the same as an enlisted person.

I agree that officers on active duty should not badmouth the CinC, and can in fact be charged for conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman if they do. "Anonymously" is the only way they can get away with it.

I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat.

[Gaffer]

In 1967 I was in cambodia. Just a couple of hundred meters in. We had been along the cambodian border for a number of days and kept recieving sniper fire from across the border. Our company commander ordered my platoon to cross over and get the snipers. So we did. I didn't even know we were crossing the border until after we were in there and the Lt got a radio call to get back. It seems there were cambodian guards coming after us. We hurried back across without incident. I found out just a few years ago while talking with my former Captain that he almost got court marshalled for that little incident. But after that we didn't get anymore sniper attacks. That was our big excursion into cambodia.

First time I heard bin kerry's story I thought it was a bunch of bull shit, then the evidence came out. You don't sneak into a country in a big noisy patrol boat on an open river. We got chased out and there were only about twenty of us moving quietly, we were the battalion recon platoon. The cambodians had lots of guards all along their border. They were friendly with the VC.

[Gaffer]

Avatar ...

Psycho doesn't know what he's talking about.

As I posted in response to his ignorance, officers can only request their resignation be accepted, and only after they serve the same initial period of commitment that enlisted serve.

Tendering a resignation is NOT disobeying an order. If an officer refuses to obey a lawfully-given order by a senior officer, that officer CAN be charged with failure to obey a lawfully given order the same as an enlisted person.

I agree that officers on active duty should not badmouth the CinC, and can in fact be charged for conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman if they do. "Anonymously" is the only way they can get away with it.

I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat.

Many are just the military version of politicians. They don't get to be generals for their military abilities in most cases. It's their connections in congress and the DoD.

[Gunny]

In 1967 I was in cambodia. Just a couple of hundred meters in. We had been along the cambodian border for a number of days and kept recieving sniper fire from across the border. Our company commander ordered my platoon to cross over and get the snipers. So we did. I didn't even know we were crossing the border until after we were in there and the Lt got a radio call to get back. It seems there were cambodian guards coming after us. We hurried back across without incident. I found out just a few years ago while talking with my former Captain that he almost got court marshalled for that little incident. But after that we didn't get anymore sniper attacks. That was our big excursion into cambodia.

First time I heard bin kerry's story I thought it was a bunch of bull shit, then the evidence came out. You don't sneak into a country in a big noisy patrol boat on an open river. We got chased out and there were only about twenty of us moving quietly, we were the battalion recon platoon. The cambodians had lots of guards all along their border. They were friendly with the VC.

Col Robert Barrow ( who was Gen Barrow, Commandant of the Marine Corps when I enlisted), during Operation Dewwy Canyon, IIRC, crossed into Laos, blew up the enemy, THEN radioed for permission; which, was denied.:laugh:

Witnesses and Kerry's own diary put him 50 miles away from Cambodia on the date he claims he was across the line, and Johnson, not Nixon was President at the time.

Just a simple case of getting caught telling "sea stories." Y'know, like three tours in Nam AND a tour in Korea?

[Psychoblues]

Lemme get this straight. "I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat."

Who in God's Hell are you trying to fool, gunny?




Avatar ...

Psycho doesn't know what he's talking about.

As I posted in response to his ignorance, officers can only request their resignation be accepted, and only after they serve the same initial period of commitment that enlisted serve.

Tendering a resignation is NOT disobeying an order. If an officer refuses to obey a lawfully-given order by a senior officer, that officer CAN be charged with failure to obey a lawfully given order the same as an enlisted person.

I agree that officers on active duty should not badmouth the CinC, and can in fact be charged for conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman if they do. "Anonymously" is the only way they can get away with it.

I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat.

Sorry, but I have never met an Admiral or even a One Star General that was not "at the top".

Maybe you and I could team up and eliminate some of these Admirals and Generals that polish chairs and play golf from the "O" Club that somehow earn their positions as otherwise TOP RANK MILITARY LEADERS.

[Gaffer]

Lemme get this straight. "I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat."

Who in God's Hell are you trying to fool, gunny?





Sorry, but I have never met an Admiral or even a One Star General that was not "at the top".

Maybe you and I could team up and eliminate some of these Admirals and Generals that polish chairs and play golf from the "O" Club that somehow earn their positions as otherwise TOP RANK MILITARY LEADERS.

And once again he shows his lack of military knowledge.

[CSM]

Lemme get this straight. "I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat."

Who in God's Hell are you trying to fool, gunny?





Sorry, but I have never met an Admiral or even a One Star General that was not "at the top".

Maybe you and I could team up and eliminate some of these Admirals and Generals that polish chairs and play golf from the "O" Club that somehow earn their positions as otherwise TOP RANK MILITARY LEADERS.

Don't know much about the upper echelons of the military hierarchy, do you Psycho.

[Gunny]

Lemme get this straight. "I'd be willing to bet that these "admirals and generals" are not at the top, and more than likely military bureaucrats more familiar with polishing chairs and leading their cronies to the O CLub for a round of golf than they are leading troops in combat."

Who in God's Hell are you trying to fool, gunny?

Question is, who are YOU trying to fool, fool? If you have some supportable evidence as to the true identities of these "admirals and generals," feel free to present it.




Sorry, but I have never met an Admiral or even a One Star General that was not "at the top".

Guess you haven't really been anywhere then. A One Star General in the greater scheme of things is quite aways from the "top." That's why there are lots of BGen's, and the numbers decrease as the rank increases.

Maybe you and I could team up and eliminate some of these Admirals and Generals that polish chairs and play golf from the "O" Club that somehow earn their positions as otherwise TOP RANK MILITARY LEADERS.

Now you're going to deny the existence of military bureaucrats? Dude, consider your audience. About half the members here, give or take a few, have military experience. You aren't serving yourself very well.

[Psychoblues]

I maintain my allegation that I never knew a General or an Admiral that was somehow "out of the loop".



Now you're going to deny the existence of military bureaucrats? Dude, consider your audience. About half the members here, give or take a few, have military experience. You aren't serving yourself very well.

You insist they exist. Please tell me more or shut the fuck up.

[Gunny]

I maintain my allegation that I never knew a General or an Admiral that was somehow "out of the loop".




You insist they exist. Please tell me more or shut the fuck up.

Tell you "more" about what, exactly?

And I'll STFU when the mood strikes me. In case you haven't noticed, you've been so owned in this thread I'm surprised you have the nerve to post in it again.

But then, you'd have be conscious enough to notice, wouldn't you?

[Psychoblues]

I've heard a lot of bullshit here, gunny, with little regard to fact or genuine policy. "I" am owned in this thread? You, sir (with a little "s" ) are completely delusional.






Tell you "more" about what, exactly?

And I'll STFU when the mood strikes me. In case you haven't noticed, you've been so owned in this thread I'm surprised you have the nerve to post in it again.

But then, you'd have be conscious enough to notice, wouldn't you?

Tell me more about these doofus Generals and Admirals that you claim to exist in the ranks of our armed forces!!!! What in the name of Christ else could you think I was asking about?

I repeat, I never knew one of those O-7 and above types that was not in the know about most everything. Did I meet any that I thought were on the dumb side? Yes. I also meet gunnys and others that I think the same about right here in DebatePolicy.

Sheesh, what freakin' jerk off you are!!!!!

[Gunny]

I've heard a lot of bullshit here, gunny, with little regard to fact or genuine policy. "I" am owned in this thread? You, sir (with a little "s" ) are completely delusional.







Tell me more about these doofus Generals and Admirals that you claim to exist in the ranks of our armed forces!!!! What in the name of Christ else could you think I was asking about?

I repeat, I never knew one of those O-7 and above types that was not in the know about most everything. Did I meet any that I thought were on the dumb side? Yes. I also meet gunnys and others that I think the same about right here in DebatePolicy.

Sheesh, what freakin' jerk off you are!!!!!

Since you asked .... few people actually have ANY idea WTF you are talking about at any given time.

Given what you have posted as your actual service -- minimal time in the USAF then a little more time in the AFNG, I'd say you probably have never actually met a General Officer that wasn't inspecting you at the POA.

You also haven't met the Gunny from THIS message board or you'd STILL be in traction.

[gabosaurus]

If Shrub ever launches an attack on Iran, he will mobilize the largest mass protest in the history of the United States.
It's been in the planning stages for almost two years. If put into motion, it would paralyze every major city in the country. Including Washington DC.
Shrub would need that helicopter he jacked around in on Sept. 11 again.

[Gunny]

If Shrub ever launches an attack on Iran, he will mobilize the largest mass protest in the history of the United States.
It's been in the planning stages for almost two years. If put into motion, it would paralyze every major city in the country. Including Washington DC.
Shrub would need that helicopter he jacked around in on Sept. 11 again.

Probably. Even if attacking Iran is completely justified in every way. Blind fools like you will run around like chickens with your heads chopped off wavng signs and being just naturally against anything Bush is for.

And I DO hope y'all show some stones and actually attack the cops.

[gabosaurus]

There is no justification for attacking Iran. Just as there was no justification for invading Iraq. The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.
The Bush apologists live in this surreal world where anything they approve of is instantly justified. I fail to understand how they can live with all that blood on their hands, but I guess Dubya sets a good example.
Death and carnage are patriotic. God bless our heroic body bags. :salute:

[Gaffer]

There is no justification for attacking Iran. Just as there was no justification for invading Iraq. The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.
The Bush apologists live in this surreal world where anything they approve of is instantly justified. I fail to understand how they can live with all that blood on their hands, but I guess Dubya sets a good example.
Death and carnage are patriotic. God bless our heroic body bags. :salute:

There is no justification for Bush to attack iran, according to you. But if it was one of your cronies in there doing the attacking you would be cheering them on. It's all about hating Bush. You live in such a warped world you can't see the reality and danger of the real one.
You definately a certified moonbat.

[gabosaurus]

There is no danger. It is a figment of Bush's imagination. He loves being the "War President." He loves the death and destruction. That is why he thanks God every day for the continuing spectre of Sept. 11.
It's the reason why the Bushies don't want to capture bin Laden. Why would you want to kill someone who did you the biggest favor of your life?

[Psychoblues]

gabby, please go back and re-read your posts and other communications before you post them. Lemme give you one example.

"The death and destruction is not real." Did you mean that statement? I think not!!!!! The death and destruction is very much real but is only considered "unreal" to the extent that you were referring to video games. You did not make that clear.




There is no justification for attacking Iran. Just as there was no justification for invading Iraq. The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.
The Bush apologists live in this surreal world where anything they approve of is instantly justified. I fail to understand how they can live with all that blood on their hands, but I guess Dubya sets a good example.
Death and carnage are patriotic. God bless our heroic body bags. :salute:

You are dealing here with some that believe gwb won the popular vote in 2000. Some here believe that Al Gore filed suit against gwb in 2000 when exactly the opposite is true. Many here have no problems with the very well documented election improprieties of 2000 and 2004. As long as "their idiot" was reinstated then it somehow gives them satisfaction. Are you listening, gabby?

These differences of opinion on these day to day disagreements and otherwise, as you say "surreal world" topics are to them simply "facts" because the reports that they observe say that they are. They don't get around like you or me and they don't want to. They are very happy in the little cocoons they have built around themselves and their filter screens are store bought and infallible as they see it. It is easier for them to accept a belief than it is for them to recognise any truth or otherwise contradictory information that might be presented to them.

I've been kicking around this board and it's former life for a few years now. If you misspell a word they will EAT YOUR LUNCH on it. Get your shit together, gabby. And keep on keeping on, that's all I ask!!!!!!

[gabosaurus]

Mr. Psychoblues, read my post again. Particularly this line:

The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.

I am not saying that the war is like a video game and the death and destruction are nor real to actual Americans. Just to the Bushies and their dittohead apologists. I don't think they have a clue about what is actually going on.
You see, REAL people are getting killed and maimed. Real people with real families and real dependents. Not just the numbers that the Bushies want to get throwing into the slaughterhouse.
The Bushies ARE playing Iraq like a video game -- "well, we can throw a couple of thousand here, and a couple fo thousand here. We might get a hundred killed, but if we kill a thousand, it will be a success!"
Bang, bang, move the joy stick around, wipe out the space aliens, move up to the next level. We're not dealing with real people here. Let's just keep playing.
Yes, it's sick. But we are dealing with sick people in a sick administration. Bush must have flashbacks to Genghis Khan or Attilla the Hun.

[Gunny]

There is no justification for attacking Iran. Just as there was no justification for invading Iraq. The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.
The Bush apologists live in this surreal world where anything they approve of is instantly justified. I fail to understand how they can live with all that blood on their hands, but I guess Dubya sets a good example.
Death and carnage are patriotic. God bless our heroic body bags. :salute:


We've had justification to declare war on Iran since 1979. Currently, they are pursuing nuclear weapons and have made a point of aiming their threats and insults at us.

What does it take with you goobers? A mushroom cloud on the horizon before you get it?

[Gunny]

There is no danger. It is a figment of Bush's imagination. He loves being the "War President." He loves the death and destruction. That is why he thanks God every day for the continuing spectre of Sept. 11.
It's the reason why the Bushies don't want to capture bin Laden. Why would you want to kill someone who did you the biggest favor of your life?

You are a fool blinded by warped, extremist political ideology.

[Gunny]

gabby, please go back and re-read your posts and other communications before you post them. Lemme give you one example.

"The death and destruction is not real." Did you mean that statement? I think not!!!!! The death and destruction is very much real but is only considered "unreal" to the extent that you were referring to video games. You did not make that clear.


You are dealing here with some that believe gwb won the popular vote in 2000. Some here believe that Al Gore filed suit against gwb in 2000 when exactly the opposite is true. Many here have no problems with the very well documented election improprieties of 2000 and 2004. As long as "their idiot" was reinstated then it somehow gives them satisfaction. Are you listening, gabby?

Please link to the post where some member here said Bush won the popular vote in 2000.

Please provide evidence that Bush is the one who filed suit against Gore first. Can't wait to see THIS flar-out fabrication.

I take great issue with the election improprieties and I hope you libs have learned your lesson that you can't steal an election the way you circumvent legislation -- through the courts.

These differences of opinion on these day to day disagreements and otherwise, as you say "surreal world" topics are to them simply "facts" because the reports that they observe say that they are. They don't get around like you or me and they don't want to. They are very happy in the little cocoons they have built around themselves and their filter screens are store bought and infallible as they see it. It is easier for them to accept a belief than it is for them to recognise any truth or otherwise contradictory information that might be presented to them.

I've been kicking around this board and it's former life for a few years now. If you misspell a word they will EAT YOUR LUNCH on it. Get your shit together, gabby. And keep on keeping on, that's all I ask!!!!!!

We're happy with reality. Something you obviously cannot get a grasp on.

[theHawk]

There is no justification for attacking Iran.

That's your opinion, nothing more. There are many Americans that believe attacking Iran would be justified, especially after making it quite clear they will continue with their nuclear plans, and stating they'd like to see Israel wiped off the map.

[Gaffer]

As usual grabyoursoreass and psickoblue are too busy watching and worrying about Bush to see the enemy on the horizon. I bet when a nuke goes off in your backyard you'll both immediately think its an attack by Bush as you turn into ash.

[Gunny]

As usual grabyoursoreass and psickoblue are too busy watching and worrying about Bush to see the enemy on the horizon.

:lmao:

I bet when a nuke goes off in your backyard you'll both immediately think its an attack by Bush as you turn into ash.

Of course. Who else is a bigger enemy of the US?

[Psychoblues]

I really have thought about that, gunny.



Of course. Who else is a bigger enemy of the US?

Obviously you haven't.

[CockySOB]

I really have thought about that, gunny.




Obviously you haven't.

Is this your mantra for the day? "I've thought about it and you haven't?" Pretty lame, Psycho, even for you.

[Psychoblues]

I dunno, CSOB. Who do thind is a bigger enemy of the USofA?


Is this your mantra for the day? "I've thought about it and you haven't?" Pretty lame, Psycho, even for you.

Maybe you could share with us who, bigger or not, are enemies of the USofA?

Lame? You are lame, CSOB. Not by a far stretch can you consider me lame on this issue.

Dig it?

[Gaffer]

I dunno, CSOB. Who do thind is a bigger enemy of the USofA?



Maybe you could share with us who, bigger or not, are enemies of the USofA?

Lame? You are lame, CSOB. Not by a far stretch can you consider me lame on this issue.

Dig it?

Had a few too many again tonight or are you typing slower than you can think?

Islam is the biggest threat to this country right now. Followed closely by liberals.

[Psychoblues]

"Again" WTF are you referring, guffer?



Had a few too many again tonight or are you typing slower than you can think?

Islam is the biggest threat to this country right now. Followed closely by liberals.

Liberals have made this country what it is and represents as truly American to the world as we now know it to be. The con's, the radical fundamentalists and the otherwise ignoramouses that deny what I have pointed out to you and to which you certainly associate yourself need simply a little nurturing and just a tad of history, economics, and civil responsibilties added to your so now lacking education.

[gabosaurus]

Islam is the biggest threat to this country right now. Followed closely by liberals.

Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!

http://www.hp945.com/e_photogallery/0503%20Summary-March'05/050307.jpg

Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!
Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!

[Gunny]

Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!

http://www.hp945.com/e_photogallery/0503%20Summary-March'05/050307.jpg

Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!
Bwaaack! Ditto Rush! Bwaaack!

You're a bigger idiot than psycho and I never thought I would EVER say that to ANYONE.

[Psychoblues]

Go ahead and shake your tail feathers, gunny!!!!!




You're a bigger idiot than psycho and I never thought I would EVER say that to ANYONE.

I know you really want to!!!!!!!!!!!

[stephanie]

Go ahead and shake your tail feathers, gunny!!!!!





I know you really want to!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey......You stop putting Gunny down...
I'm gonna have to sic the Baron on you...

[Psychoblues]

I'm not trying to hide anything, gunny. WTF are you talking about? You got specifics or attitudes? I can deal with specifics but your attitudes are your own.



Since you asked .... few people actually have ANY idea WTF you are talking about at any given time.

Given what you have posted as your actual service -- minimal time in the USAF then a little more time in the AFNG, I'd say you probably have never actually met a General Officer that wasn't inspecting you at the POA.

You also haven't met the Gunny from THIS message board or you'd STILL be in traction.

My best drinkin' buddy in Korea was a Lt. General and my second most best drinkin' buddy was a Major General. I had some other run of the mill Cols. Lt. Cols., Majors and a few Captains I ran with as well. I loved every one of them and I stay in contact with a few of them.

Just who do you think you are fuckin' with, lil' snitchass gunny? And if you had ever met this Psychoblues you'd have had to get a replacement for your teeth plates and a nose reconstruction. I've been nothing other than honest in my descriptions of my military service. You hate it. Why?

[stephanie]

Good Grief Psycho.....The last post in this thread was Sunday..
You do realise it's Tuesday, right..

Give it a rest..

:cheers2:

[Psychoblues]

I just love revivals, don't you know!!!! When the Spirit is moving, well, it's just got to move, don't you know!!!!



Good Grief Psycho.....The last post in this thread was Sunday..
You do realise it's Tuesday, right..

Give it a rest..

:cheers2:

There is NO REST in the work of GOD.

[stephanie]

I just love revivals, don't you know!!!! When the Spirit is moving, well, it's just got to move, don't you know!!!!




There is NO REST in the work of GOD.

Okey Dokey.....Carry on.:cheers2:

[Psychoblues]

It took you a lot of time and manuveuring to come up with that?



Okey Dokey.....Carry on.:cheers2:

:cheers2:

[stephanie]

It took you a lot of time and maneuvering to come up with that?




:cheers2:

Hell ya......It took me a half a hour to think that up...
Ya gotta remember, I'm just a redneck kinda gal, it takes me......timeeeeeeeeeeeeeee to figure things out........:poke:

[theHawk]

There is no justification for attacking Iran. Just as there was no justification for invading Iraq. The Bushies just enjoy getting their war on. It's like a giant video game to them. The death and destruction is not real.
The Bush apologists live in this surreal world where anything they approve of is instantly justified. I fail to understand how they can live with all that blood on their hands, but I guess Dubya sets a good example.
Death and carnage are patriotic. God bless our heroic body bags. :salute:

And as you clearly fail to understand is that Iran will continue to do whatever the hell it wants, like their abduction of 15 British sailors.

But then again in your mind sitting back and watching Iran put hostages on trial and executing them is your patriotic duty. I'm willing to bet for those hostages it isn't a giant video game.


My guess is that no matter what Iran does, for you liberals there will never be "justification" to attack them.

[grunt]

I'm not trying to hide anything, gunny. WTF are you talking about? You got specifics or attitudes? I can deal with specifics but your attitudes are your own.




My best drinkin' buddy in Korea was a Lt. General and my second most best drinkin' buddy was a Major General. I had some other run of the mill Cols. Lt. Cols., Majors and a few Captains I ran with as well. I loved every one of them and I stay in contact with a few of them.

Just who do you think you are fuckin' with, lil' snitchass gunny? And if you had ever met this Psychoblues you'd have had to get a replacement for your teeth plates and a nose reconstruction. I've been nothing other than honest in my descriptions of my military service. You hate it. Why?


I'm calling BULLSHIT on this big time. No LtCol, much less General grade officer would EVER been seen or want to hang out with an uneducated moron such as yourself. You are such a fucking liar! This is too funny. I almost believed you were in the AF too. You're so full of shit.

Is there an ignore option around here? I can't stand to associate with habitual liars.

And on top of that he tries to act like an internet badass!! LMFAO!!

[Psychoblues]

What I say is true. You got something more substantial than your big crying mouth to dispute it?




I'm calling BULLSHIT on this big time. No LtCol, much less General grade officer would EVER been seen or want to hang out with an uneducated moron such as yourself. You are such a fucking liar! This is too funny. I almost believed you were in the AF too. You're so full of shit.

Is there an ignore option around here? I can't stand to associate with habitual liars.

And on top of that he tries to act like an internet badass!! LMFAO!!

I am not and have never pretended to be any kind of an "internet badass". How do you draw that conclusion, grunt?

Have you spoken with your doctors about the way you are feeling?