Larry Gude
Strung Out
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070514/D8P3UTV80.html
...wouldn't that be a good place to destroy?
...wouldn't that be a good place to destroy?
If we're at war...
- Thread starter Larry Gude
- Start date
Lugnut
I'm Rick James #####!
Larry Gude said:
I don't understand why we need "proof". They claim to have been behind the attack. Kill them.
Why do we go back and say "Well yeah, you SAY you did but MAYBE you attacked us and maybe you didn't. Prove it was you and THEN I'll think about caving in your skull"
WTF?
That is what happens when politicians start running a war.
Wars should be left to generals to run.
Politicians need to do what they do best whatever that is.
Wars should be left to generals to run.
Politicians need to do what they do best whatever that is.
JPC sr
James P. Cusick Sr.
JPC sr "EXTRODIANIRE".
Of course not, there are innocent men, innocent women and innocent children in that town.
If the USA wants to keep claiming that we are liberating Iraq and not some tyrant invader then we can not destroy an entire town.
It might be better to ask why a small American group was there at dark early dawn? and why they had no air cover? nor reconnesaince? and why did it take the rapid response team an hour to get to the scene? when they knew it was a hot dangerous area?
We could get a little clarity on what really happened before giving an order to kill them all.
Larry Gude said:
Of course not, there are innocent men, innocent women and innocent children in that town.If the USA wants to keep claiming that we are liberating Iraq and not some tyrant invader then we can not destroy an entire town.
It might be better to ask why a small American group was there at dark early dawn? and why they had no air cover? nor reconnesaince? and why did it take the rapid response team an hour to get to the scene? when they knew it was a hot dangerous area?
We could get a little clarity on what really happened before giving an order to kill them all.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Yes we can...
...and we should have; a long time ago. Sometimes you have to destroy a village to save it. That's just the way it is.
Germany and Japan were trashed after WWII with millions of innocent men, women and children dead or crippled, all their possessions gone, their homes, everything. That's typically what it takes to win a war.
JPC sr said:If the USA wants to keep claiming that we are liberating Iraq and not some tyrant invader then we can not destroy an entire town.
...and we should have; a long time ago. Sometimes you have to destroy a village to save it. That's just the way it is.
Germany and Japan were trashed after WWII with millions of innocent men, women and children dead or crippled, all their possessions gone, their homes, everything. That's typically what it takes to win a war.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I don't have...
...a whole lot of confidence that our Generals are doing the job either. I have yet to hear of Bush replacing someone for being to aggressive. I have yet to see anyone resign because they are not being given orders and support to win the fight.
I have seen our CIC go on, endlessly, that our commanders are getting everything they ask for and are getting his full support to win.
Much does not add up.
2ndAmendment said:
...a whole lot of confidence that our Generals are doing the job either. I have yet to hear of Bush replacing someone for being to aggressive. I have yet to see anyone resign because they are not being given orders and support to win the fight.
I have seen our CIC go on, endlessly, that our commanders are getting everything they ask for and are getting his full support to win.
Much does not add up.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
It is not necessary to...
...kill them all. There are plenty of Germans and Japanese today to attest to that. The goal is, see, to fight hard enough, in a war, to get the other side to quit. Or, they do it to you.
JPC sr said:
If the USA wants to keep claiming that we are liberating Iraq and not some tyrant invader then we can not destroy an entire town.
It might be better to ask why a small American group was there at dark early dawn? and why they had no air cover? nor reconnesaince? and why did it take the rapid response team an hour to get to the scene? when they knew it was a hot dangerous area?
We could get a little clarity on what really happened before giving an order to kill them all.
...kill them all. There are plenty of Germans and Japanese today to attest to that. The goal is, see, to fight hard enough, in a war, to get the other side to quit. Or, they do it to you.
The liberals have lost sight that war is supposed to be "hell." It is the aim or should be of each side to make the circumstances and consequences absolutely intolerable to prosecute the war any longer for the other side. Either that or one side completely annihilates the other side. The side that successfully does either of those wins. It is that simpleLarry Gude said:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
See...
...I'm sorry, but I can't just lay this on the whipping boys. They could do and did do NOTHING to stop us from getting on with it four years ago. This has been like surgery with a spoon; we just keep niggling and niggling instead of getting on with it, like digging out a splinter with a spoon. I've said this before; You (we), W, could NOT let this drag on. That had to be made clear long before the decision was made to go. What happens if it drags on? Viet Nam. So, it has drug on.
Opposition was, is a given and, sometimes, even with fair reason. If you know it's raining and you walk to the mailbox, whose fault is it you got soaked?
There ain't a whole lot to this war business, never was; Get on with it or it's gonna be miserable...until you get on with it.
2ndAmendment said:
...I'm sorry, but I can't just lay this on the whipping boys. They could do and did do NOTHING to stop us from getting on with it four years ago. This has been like surgery with a spoon; we just keep niggling and niggling instead of getting on with it, like digging out a splinter with a spoon. I've said this before; You (we), W, could NOT let this drag on. That had to be made clear long before the decision was made to go. What happens if it drags on? Viet Nam. So, it has drug on.
Opposition was, is a given and, sometimes, even with fair reason. If you know it's raining and you walk to the mailbox, whose fault is it you got soaked?
There ain't a whole lot to this war business, never was; Get on with it or it's gonna be miserable...until you get on with it.
OK. Change liberals to people.Larry Gude said:
War is just a fight with friends invited to participate. When a fight breaks out, you don't fight for a draw; you fight to win.
You know I teach karate. I teach that the best fight is the one you are not in. The next best fight is the one you win. If you have to fight, the aim is to stop the fight as quickly as you can while winning. Do whatever is appropriate to end the fight including, if the fight is life or death, taking the other person's life.
Wars need to be fought the same way.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
There it is...
...and I'm saying the responsibility lays in the Whitehouse, not the media or the people. He had the support to go and it was up to him to see that it was gotten on with.
2ndAmendment said:
...and I'm saying the responsibility lays in the Whitehouse, not the media or the people. He had the support to go and it was up to him to see that it was gotten on with.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I know I am a broken record on this thing...
...but damn, it's not like we've suddenly gotten a clue and gotten on with it.
The key element, as we're told, of the surge is to put small groups of soldiers among the population so as to discourage the militias and criminals. Well, that's chasing the last problem; allowing the militias and criminals to get established in the first place.
So now, our people are spread out into smaller units and walking a beat, winning hearts and minds. And they are vulnerable.
What next? A new surge that says we need to use larger units?
In the meantime, Sunni's and Al queda are doing what they need to do; take safe harbor where it is; in densely populated areas, and launching dramatic attacks, both suicide and, now, capturing a small unit of US troops whom they've obviously been watching for weeks so as to plan how to get at them.
We long ago lost the initiatve and it's a tough thing to get back.
ylexot said:Sadr City should have been leveled.
...but damn, it's not like we've suddenly gotten a clue and gotten on with it.
The key element, as we're told, of the surge is to put small groups of soldiers among the population so as to discourage the militias and criminals. Well, that's chasing the last problem; allowing the militias and criminals to get established in the first place.
So now, our people are spread out into smaller units and walking a beat, winning hearts and minds. And they are vulnerable.
What next? A new surge that says we need to use larger units?
In the meantime, Sunni's and Al queda are doing what they need to do; take safe harbor where it is; in densely populated areas, and launching dramatic attacks, both suicide and, now, capturing a small unit of US troops whom they've obviously been watching for weeks so as to plan how to get at them.
We long ago lost the initiatve and it's a tough thing to get back.
OK. Here is a plan.Larry Gude said:
- Publicly stage our B-52s, B-1s, B-2s, etc, in range of Iraq
- Fly in as many C-5A's, C-141s, C-130s, and other transport as we can
- Pull out all our troops overnight
- Watch everyone pucker
- make the whole place a glowing beacon from space
High EGT
Gort! Klaatu barada nikto
Larry Gude said:
What we have layed whitness to is our Gov and people have attempted to civilize a uncivilise action (e.i. WAR). War as a political tool has been used for centuries but the key differance today is our attempt to conduct WAR where casualties are the upmost important rather then the goal. If you doubt this then check history as to casualty rates of single conficts during the CW, WWI & II and Korea. Today if we loose one soldier or inocent civ the news is rampted up as unexceptable and at its worst thrown back in Americas face
Having been over there in the "Triangle of death" there are 2 ways it can be fought. A. Destroy everything, napalm, WP and torch all structures, wreck the entire city, kill every living thing that exists, ==donkey's with bombs, suicide bombers, even the kid with the grenade. Put holes in every wall that stands, adn then once its a pile of rubble blow it up some more. Similiar to what we did in Fallujah. 3 weeks of constant bombs falling, just decimating everything that exists.... The good side to it is we kill the enemy, everything dies, and we stop getting attacked. Troops are a plenty and the numbers are at all time highs. The downside? The bleeding heart peace activists claim that its killing innocent people, and call everyone executioners... Troops are threatened with court martial, and everyone gets screwed.
The other side is, let it exists how it is... pull the troops out or to their lowest levels and let the Iraq Security Forces handle the problem. Troops are at risk to be kidnapped because of such small unit sizes, and the risk of being "overrun" is very great. The insurgents/terrorists rule the land.... not only in spirit, but build a base of operations comparable to our US bases.... and continue their assaults/training. The US is blamed for not doing enough, and the peace activists still aren't happy because the sectarian killings go up.
Plan C. Pull everyone out, leave the country and let Iraq become the next terrorist disneyworld. All the terrorists that train there, can now come to the USA and continue their jihad. If we meet their demands of leaving, they call for something else -the destruction of israel. If they get that, then they demand that the US be destroyed as well. All apart of the cycle of life. These people are never happy, with good reason, its 120 degree's on a good day there... and they gotta live there. So in reality its always giong to continue. If this were a jungle war, it would be way worse... trust me.
The other side is, let it exists how it is... pull the troops out or to their lowest levels and let the Iraq Security Forces handle the problem. Troops are at risk to be kidnapped because of such small unit sizes, and the risk of being "overrun" is very great. The insurgents/terrorists rule the land.... not only in spirit, but build a base of operations comparable to our US bases.... and continue their assaults/training. The US is blamed for not doing enough, and the peace activists still aren't happy because the sectarian killings go up.
Plan C. Pull everyone out, leave the country and let Iraq become the next terrorist disneyworld. All the terrorists that train there, can now come to the USA and continue their jihad. If we meet their demands of leaving, they call for something else -the destruction of israel. If they get that, then they demand that the US be destroyed as well. All apart of the cycle of life. These people are never happy, with good reason, its 120 degree's on a good day there... and they gotta live there. So in reality its always giong to continue. If this were a jungle war, it would be way worse... trust me.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Let's chalk this up...
...to you not knowing me. Let's just say I've read my history and we can discuss bloodshed and it's role in war fighting in a different thread.
At the end of the day, in every US involved conflict, the people wanted reason, the soldiers wanted reason, something noble, something bigger than themselves in order to sanctify and accept the losses. A 120 degree #### hole where the people devoutly kill each other over whether a nephew or some other dude is the proper person to think of as succesor to their prophet ain't getting it done.
Korea, Vietnam, same thing. Bad wars. Nothing to hold onto accept the mission, duty, itself. We can blame the media, each other or even the CIC all day, every day or we can accept things for what they are. There is no slavery to kill to ennoble the loss. There is no global threat, certainly not now from Iraq, if there ever was and it certainly rings hollow with Iran and North Korea at issue.
This was a noble idea, liberation, that could NOT drag on because there simply isn't enough 'there' there to sustain a free peoples willingness to sacrifice one son or 100,000 sons. We find ourselves in a netherworld of fighting/not fighting between people who rather clearly need to sort this out for themselves. Because we can't do that for them.
High EGT said:
...to you not knowing me. Let's just say I've read my history and we can discuss bloodshed and it's role in war fighting in a different thread.
At the end of the day, in every US involved conflict, the people wanted reason, the soldiers wanted reason, something noble, something bigger than themselves in order to sanctify and accept the losses. A 120 degree #### hole where the people devoutly kill each other over whether a nephew or some other dude is the proper person to think of as succesor to their prophet ain't getting it done.
Korea, Vietnam, same thing. Bad wars. Nothing to hold onto accept the mission, duty, itself. We can blame the media, each other or even the CIC all day, every day or we can accept things for what they are. There is no slavery to kill to ennoble the loss. There is no global threat, certainly not now from Iraq, if there ever was and it certainly rings hollow with Iran and North Korea at issue.
This was a noble idea, liberation, that could NOT drag on because there simply isn't enough 'there' there to sustain a free peoples willingness to sacrifice one son or 100,000 sons. We find ourselves in a netherworld of fighting/not fighting between people who rather clearly need to sort this out for themselves. Because we can't do that for them.