Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 108
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Think Solyndra and you have my city. Not far from San Jose and SE of San Francisco.
    Posts
    6,090
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by revelarts


    But you know none of that is true.
    so Drummond whines about the Independent being a liberal paper. which has ZERO to do with the fact that Afghanistan is a hot mess that no one, not even Alexander the Great, has ever been able to defeat. America and the U.K. can add it's names to the list of empires that have come fought, and left. Left SOON i hope.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    I call bullshit on that bolded above. Had we went in with all our might and blasted the country as we easily could have done in less than 3 months time the entire country would have been decimated and their defeat would have been a sealed fate.
    So your view that NOBODY can defeat them is GROSSLY WRONG!
    I could have if given command of our military issued orders that would have defeated them. Our military holds back too damn much! And always has ever since the victory in WW2. Any military historian worth his salt can safely vouch for that..
    Come on we can (or once could have) defeated the Soviets and the Chinese combined but we could never defeat the bastards in A-stan!!!!!
    Our country has not fought a war all out since WW2!!!!
    And that politically induced mistake has cost us dearly both in treasure and more importantly lives lost...--Tyr
    Author Peter Green explains in his top rated book that Alexander the Great did defeat Afghanistan.

    To understand the role of the USA in Afghanistan, one needs to refer to General Tommy Franks book where he explains he did not intend to invade, but intended to have a civil war and help the Northern Alliance win using Air power or bomb and missile power supplied by his forces.

    But he did not invade as he did in Iraq.

    Ask Franks if he defeated Saddam and I believe he would say he did. This was with an actual invasion.

    I believe TYR when he says he would have kicked some butt.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Think Solyndra and you have my city. Not far from San Jose and SE of San Francisco.
    Posts
    6,090
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Prior to 9/11 we cared not a whit about the Taliban and didn't post 9/11 up until they refused to turn over OBL. So what is our winning strategy against a group we don't care about (but for AQ connections)?
    Were we wrong for the Clinton team to not care about the Taliban where he only turned his attention to bombing Iraq over and over and over? Maybe he should not have bombed Yugoslavia over and over for many many days. And the war against Yugoslavia was based on lies. But the media actively promoted that war.

    0bama does not have a winning plan or strategy.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    21,182
    Thanks (Given)
    2989
    Thanks (Received)
    2639
    Likes (Given)
    396
    Likes (Received)
    428
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    15
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7688011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert A Whit View Post
    Were we wrong for the Clinton team to not care about the Taliban where he only turned his attention to bombing Iraq over and over and over? Maybe he should not have bombed Yugoslavia over and over for many many days. And the war against Yugoslavia was based on lies. But the media actively promoted that war.

    0bama does not have a winning plan or strategy.
    BO may not have one but the question raised is there ANY winning strategy in Afg. I'm not sure I get the point of your question. We should be concerned about our national securities first and foremost; the Taliban not so much, AQ definitely.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    South Wales, UK
    Posts
    11,895
    Thanks (Given)
    20722
    Thanks (Received)
    8222
    Likes (Given)
    2213
    Likes (Received)
    1127
    Piss Off (Given)
    5
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19319388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    BO may not have one but the question raised is there ANY winning strategy in Afg. I'm not sure I get the point of your question. We should be concerned about our national securities first and foremost; the Taliban not so much, AQ definitely.
    To an extent, this defies logic. It also absolutely defies historical fact.

    In case you've forgotten, the Taliban played host to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, back at the turn of the century.

    Now, what do you imagine would happen if the Taliban, once again, managed to gain control of Afghanistan ? Do you know that they would NOT, again, facilitate groups such as Al Qaeda ?

    If this came to pass .. what do you think would follow from it ? A determination to go BACK to Afghanistan and finally finish the job ? Or, would Lefties instead unite in a chorus of 'This is unwinnable .. we must sit back, keep clear of Afghanistan altogether, and adopt a bunker mentality to security instead' ?

    In such a scenario, security forces must always successfully defend against threats, the scope or severity of which they cannot control, because they're not stemming the cause of them at their source.

    The issues you raised are interconnected, all important, all requiring the proper, remedial action to best serve America's security needs.
    Last edited by Drummond; 04-21-2013 at 09:01 PM.
    It's That Bloody Foreigner Again !!!

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    21,182
    Thanks (Given)
    2989
    Thanks (Received)
    2639
    Likes (Given)
    396
    Likes (Received)
    428
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    15
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7688011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drummond View Post
    To an extent, this defies logic. It also absolutely defies historical fact.

    In case you've forgotten, the Taliban played host to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, back at the turn of the century.
    Do you purposely not read everything?

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Prior to 9/11 we cared not a whit about the Taliban and didn't post 9/11 up until they refused to turn over OBL. So what is our winning strategy against a group we don't care about (but for AQ connections)?
    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    BWe should be concerned about our national securities first and foremost; the Taliban not so much, AQ definitely.
    IIRC Bush was perfectly willing to let the Taliban go on their merry way if they would only turn over OBL, et al. Does that sound like the Taliban being our enemy?

    So, what would be our winning strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Drummond View Post
    ... Or, would Lefties instead ...
    Always with the Lefties with you... I know it's a crutch but come on.
    Last edited by fj1200; 04-21-2013 at 10:56 PM.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    26,623
    Thanks (Given)
    31009
    Thanks (Received)
    17055
    Likes (Given)
    3145
    Likes (Received)
    2771
    Piss Off (Given)
    20
    Piss Off (Received)
    2
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Always with the Lefties with you... I know it's a crutch but come on.
    So what? He should deny a known fact to please your view that the lefties are docile and of little consequence in American or British politics?
    I'd say it is not he that has the crutch but instead it is you and your obvious need to placate the leftists. -Tyr
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    21,182
    Thanks (Given)
    2989
    Thanks (Received)
    2639
    Likes (Given)
    396
    Likes (Received)
    428
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    15
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7688011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    So what? He should deny a known fact to please your view that the lefties are docile and of little consequence in American or British politics?
    Invocation of a fallacy is not a "known fact."

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    I'd say it is not he that has the crutch but instead it is you and your obvious need to placate the leftists. -Tyr
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    66,238
    Thanks (Given)
    7253
    Thanks (Received)
    32408
    Likes (Given)
    6107
    Likes (Received)
    6985
    Piss Off (Given)
    13
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    490 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    so Drummond whines about the Independent being a liberal paper. which has ZERO to do with the fact that Afghanistan is a hot mess that no one, not even Alexander the Great, has ever been able to defeat. America and the U.K. can add it's names to the list of empires that have come fought, and left. Left SOON i hope.
    That's because liberal weenies want to redefine war and how we fight it. If it were REALLY a war, and we didn't tie the hands of our soldiers, we could have obliterated Afghanistan. Going cave to cave is effing stupid, and what they count on to "win", that and time. If we don't "win", do you really see them "winning"? Simply because they hid for years and years? Eradicate and defeat them in days, or GTFO.
    How do you catch a unique rabbit? Unique up on him! (was my Mom's favorite joke )

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Think Solyndra and you have my city. Not far from San Jose and SE of San Francisco.
    Posts
    6,090
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by revelarts

    so Drummond whines about the Independent being a liberal paper. which has ZERO to do with the fact that Afghanistan is a hot mess that no one, not even Alexander the Great, has ever been able to defeat. America and the U.K. can add it's names to the list of empires that have come fought, and left. Left SOON i hope.
    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    That's because liberal weenies want to redefine war and how we fight it. If it were REALLY a war, and we didn't tie the hands of our soldiers, we could have obliterated Afghanistan. Going cave to cave is effing stupid, and what they count on to "win", that and time. If we don't "win", do you really see them "winning"? Simply because they hid for years and years? Eradicate and defeat them in days, or GTFO.
    They need to stop saying Alexander the Great did not defeat them. Peter Green and A.B. Bosworth both top rated historians explain that Alexander the Great did defeat that area and proceeded past Pakistan into India and due to various factors, the army turned back home with generals in charge of defeated areas.

    General Franks realized the problem so he put his efforts backing the natives who fought the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Bin Laden fled and was never proven to have been in the battle areas.

    Bush correctly tried to keep the war in the hands of the natives of Afghanistan.

    The natives can mop up. There is no need at all for the US troops to lose lives trying to do the job of the natives living there.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    South Wales, UK
    Posts
    11,895
    Thanks (Given)
    20722
    Thanks (Received)
    8222
    Likes (Given)
    2213
    Likes (Received)
    1127
    Piss Off (Given)
    5
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    164 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19319388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    IIRC Bush was perfectly willing to let the Taliban go on their merry way if they would only turn over OBL, et al. Does that sound like the Taliban being our enemy?
    What it 'sounds like' is Bush giving the Taliban the chance to do the decent thing.

    I am perfectly aware of the opportunity Bush gave them to turn OBL over to American forces. He waited for a couple of weeks for them to comply, didn't he ? HOWEVER .. WHAT WAS THEIR RESPONSE ?

    ... answer ... THEY REFUSED. They preferred to risk an all-out attack on Afghanistan to complying .. well aware that military forces had been sent to the region in readiness to act.

    And we know how they've been conducting themselves since that time, don't we ? AS THE TERRORIST ENEMIES THAT THEY ARE.

    So, what would be our winning strategy?
    You need my advice ?

    I suspect that the answer isn't quite as simple as flooding the territory with far greater numbers of troops. Although, frankly, it works for me ! Let them get a taste of real opposition, a display of military might. Let them understand how puny a force they really are, by comparison.

    Do you not have highly effective, non-nuclear yet powerful, means to bomb the daylights out of whatever strongholds they still have ?

    What ultimately matters is that (a) you show opposition through a show of strength .. and NOT weakness .. and, (b) resolve does NOT evaporate away. The point being to break your enemy's morale.

    Always with the Lefties with you... I know it's a crutch but come on.
    It's simply the truth.

    Would you have me think that there is no such thing as a Leftie mentality ? Or that there are no set parameters defining what one can expect a Leftie to say or argue for ? Perhaps ... there are no such things as Left-wing political entities, with manifestos which define their thinking ?

    No, Leftie thinking has certain characteristics which show up again and again. Such as, a willingness, maybe even a determination, to be soft on terrorists, come-what-may. Observe someone approaching with an appeasement strategy ... the chances are high that it comes from a Leftie.

    Some of us are thoroughly sick of those sellout-types. Such as myself.
    It's That Bloody Foreigner Again !!!

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    21,182
    Thanks (Given)
    2989
    Thanks (Received)
    2639
    Likes (Given)
    396
    Likes (Received)
    428
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    15
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7688011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drummond View Post
    What it 'sounds like' is Bush giving the Taliban the chance to do the decent thing.
    ...
    And we know how they've been conducting themselves since that time, don't we ? AS THE TERRORIST ENEMIES THAT THEY ARE.
    Regardless of what it 'sounds like' it shows that the Taliban was not the enemy but for the AQ presence. Proper enemy identification is key.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drummond View Post
    You need my advice ?
    Not really. Now explain why we should extend that to every other failed nation state that harbors terrorists.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drummond View Post
    It's simply the truth.

    Would you have me think that there is no such thing as a Leftie mentality ?
    The problem is constant misapplication of "leftie mentality."
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Think Solyndra and you have my city. Not far from San Jose and SE of San Francisco.
    Posts
    6,090
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Regardless of what it 'sounds like' it shows that the Taliban was not the enemy but for the AQ presence. Proper enemy identification is key.



    Not really. Now explain why we should extend that to every other failed nation state that harbors terrorists.



    The problem is constant misapplication of "leftie mentality."
    Read General Franks book since he commanded Centcom.

    Franks men were not the fighters. Franks ramped way up the presence of the CIA and they paid the northern alliance and the Taliban were indeed the enemy of the northern alliance.

    Our role was to facilitate. I guess too few recall the actual war or have not yet read Franks book on this. Franks added our air-power to the fighting done by the Afghanistan fighters.

    Franks intended to bust up the freedom of the AQ in order to eliminate their using the country as a base. Sure, he hoped to also get Bin Laden but blowing up locations he might be at is not a very good way to capture a person. OBL was not observed. And Franks was livid that the Afghans refused to go into Tora Bora, hoping that maybe OBL was there. But he never was seen by anybody.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    26,623
    Thanks (Given)
    31009
    Thanks (Received)
    17055
    Likes (Given)
    3145
    Likes (Received)
    2771
    Piss Off (Given)
    20
    Piss Off (Received)
    2
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Invocation of a fallacy is not a "known fact."



    Invocation of the truth is and always will be amigo..
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Think Solyndra and you have my city. Not far from San Jose and SE of San Francisco.
    Posts
    6,090
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    Invocation of the truth is and always will be amigo..
    I am puzzled. I have read, I suppose, all of your posts or most of them. I know you speak the truth. Why would a sane person claim you speak fallacies?

  15. #30
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    26,623
    Thanks (Given)
    31009
    Thanks (Received)
    17055
    Likes (Given)
    3145
    Likes (Received)
    2771
    Piss Off (Given)
    20
    Piss Off (Received)
    2
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robert A Whit View Post
    I am puzzled. I have read, I suppose, all of your posts or most of them. I know you speak the truth. Why would a sane person claim you speak fallacies?
    That particular person happens to be a very confused liberal that thinks(or pretends that) he is a conservative. He needs help and I've been tutoring him for a long time now. Tha' guy is a very poor student but I have great hope a miracle shall fall from the sky and he open his eyes to see the light. The generous thing to do is to say a small prayer for him!
    That is iffin' ya can find it in your heart to overlook his blabbering appeasing posts and ego...
    RSR NAILS HIM SO OFTEN THAT HE WEIGHS AN EXTRA TWENTY POUNDS JUST FROM THE IRON! --Tyr
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums