RebelKev Wrote:That's all there is to it. A mod of mine said it all:

http://usmilnet.com/smf/index.php?topic=6274.0


Frank's post at the very bottom. Only thing I have to add is a shitload of expletives.


Oh, and for those of you that think Republicans are Chickenhawks,

http://www.vote4frank.com/bio.htm

http://www.vote4frank.com/service.htm


You libs do not know of what you ask. This isn't f'n Vietnam. I pray it's not my f'n city that's attacked next. Since libs tend to horde in large cities, maybe you guys will be the only ones affected. When it DOES happen, not IF it happens, DOES, do NOT ***** about a damn thing. It was you guys that decided to give up.

You live in Augusta, I don't think you are in any danger.

fsquid Wrote:You live in Augusta, I don't think you are in any danger.

You don't know what the **** you're talking about. Augusta, home to Ft. Gordon, the US Army Signal Center. CECOM(Communications and Electronics Command), from Ft. Monmouth, NJ, whom I contract. Ft. Wainwright, AK, home to the 172d Stryker Bde. and Ft. Lewis, Wa., home to the 1-25th ID (Stryker) and 3-2d ID (Stryker), some of the most deployable units in the US Army, and units I support on the ground and at their home installation.


It's better to be thought of as a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Here's a suggestion for you, Squid, google the units I mentioned and add "Iraq" to them. Tell us what'cha find.

you still aren't. Terrorists don't target black people and Augusta has a ton of them.

fsquid Wrote:you still aren't. Terrorists don't target black people and Augusta has a ton of them.

Last I checked I was white. Also, last I checked, I am only based here. I work throughout the globe. As for no danger to people in Augusta, there are about 3 deployable units on Ft. Gordon who have been in constant rotation to Afghanistan or Iraq, the 249th General Hospital, 44th Medical Brigade(XVIII Airborne), the 93rd Signal Brigade, and the 513th MI Brigade. Also, last I checked, the Savannah River Site, yes, the one that is mentioned in Sum of All Fears, who makes Nukes, or made them, as well as Tritium, is right across the river. Nah, no reason that would be a target. Hell, we're also home to one of the largest golf tournaments in the world, the Masters.....but we all know terrorists don't want to target large groups of people, right?

You made this about me and now you're trying to backpedal. You said I was in no danger without knowing a ******* thing about me, or what I do.

ok, Augusta is in danger for 4 days a year. I'll give you that one. Still, Augusta and the cities in the South are not probable targets. They'll try to attack some place that the country as a whole would be offended by (the ones with large amounts of whites).

fsquid Wrote:ok, Augusta is in danger for 4 days a year. I'll give you that one. Still, Augusta and the cities in the South are not probable targets. They'll try to attack some place that the country as a whole would be offended by (the ones with large amounts of whites).

You didn't make it about Augusta. You made it about me.

In all honesty I don't think it has anything to do with skin color.

It has to do with the cities known around the world. Augusta is not known in the middle east. LA, NYC, Chicago, etc., are the known cities and, IMO, are the biggest targets.

RebelKev Wrote:

NIU007 Wrote:Because the Dems didn't vote to cut funding to force the soldiers out of Iraq, that makes them worse than the guy that put them there and is keeping them there, in the first place? The republican congressmen didn't vote to pull them out either. Bush hasn't pulled them out either. What kind of logic is that?

That little non-binding resolution wasn't as pointless as you think it was. Our enemy received the message loud and clear. No, I don't think the Dems understand this as I don't think they know how to defend this nation. To them it's just an attack on the President. They couldn't be more f'n wrong.

I don't think "the enemy" (who is it this weak by the way? The shiite militias and government troops backed by Iran? The Sunnis that are bombing said shiites? I'm losing track. Try and be specific who you are talking about here) was tipped off by this vote that the war is unpopular politically here. They've known that for some time.

This resolution is just setting up the future debate, where the Democrats will demand that future troops sent to Iraq be combat ready certified, and Republicans will argue that we should send them anyway.

It is time to start redeploying from mediating the civil war, and following the Baker-Hamilton process towards a regional dialogue that will prevent it from spreading. Then we should commit more troops to eastern and southern Afghanistan to fight the sonsofbitches that attacked us and begin the long process of rebuilding our armed forces and military capabilities from the failure that has been this administration's idea to "democratize" the middle east through an elective war in Iraq.

The Iraq war was a high-stakes gamble and turned into the biggest foreign policy mistake this country has ever made. We're approaching a trillion dollars before this thing is done. What do we have to show for it, as far as returns in the war-on-terrorism? None. The facts point to one conclusion: We're rope-a-doping ourselves.

The question for those observing this debate is simple. Do you continue to listen to people like Bush, Cheney, Tony Snow and Rebel Kev, who have been wrong EVERY STEP of the way thus far, whose judgment and instinct have consistently been wrong every step of the way? Or do we reach a point where we say enough is enough -- Events have proven you wrong over and over again, you have no more credibility, and the days where we should defer to your obscene and laughable assertions about what will happen if we do x, y, or z in this war and take you seriously are simply over. Its time YOU start listening to the people who have been RIGHT all along. People like Pat Buchanan, Barrack Obama, Howard Dean, James Baker, and William F. Buckley.

Speaking of Buckley.... I think he sums up the failure of the Iraq war and the administration's challenge in coming to terms with that failure here:

http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/bu...241451.asp

The problem is, that Buckley wrote this one year ago. One year later and still, no realization from the administration that failure has occurred... hundreds of more American lives lost, immeasurable more power ceded to an ascendant Iran, and still no acceptance of the fact that we have lost. When is the rest of the so-called conservative movement going to stop drinking the kool-aid, wake up from the neo-conservative nightmare, and get back to following the traditional conservatism of Buckley, Buchanan, and Baker?

OUGwave Wrote:This resolution is just setting up the future debate, where the Democrats will demand that future troops sent to Iraq be combat ready certified, and Republicans will argue that we should send them anyway.

Combat ready certified? {Looks through military regs}

I don't see this anywhere? Was it a certification when you were in? You did serve, correct?

RebelKev Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:ok, Augusta is in danger for 4 days a year. I'll give you that one. Still, Augusta and the cities in the South are not probable targets. They'll try to attack some place that the country as a whole would be offended by (the ones with large amounts of whites).

You didn't make it about Augusta. You made it about me.

maybe we can get the little Indian from the old commercials to shed a ******* tear. Augusta isn't in danger, you aren't in danger. Heck, while Charlotte might be in danger because of the banking here, I'm probably not in any danger either unless I was uptown at the time of an attack.

The Assault on the Grunts:

http://www.jeffemanuel.blogspot.com/


....but what does he know, he was only there as well.

RebelKev Wrote:

OUGwave Wrote:This resolution is just setting up the future debate, where the Democrats will demand that future troops sent to Iraq be combat ready certified, and Republicans will argue that we should send them anyway.

Combat ready certified? {Looks through military regs}

I don't see this anywhere? Was it a certification when you were in? You did serve, correct?

Wall Street Journal:

"The readiness of Army units for combat is measured on a scale of one to four. Units rated at the lower ends of the spectrum

fsquid Wrote:

RebelKev Wrote:

fsquid Wrote:ok, Augusta is in danger for 4 days a year. I'll give you that one. Still, Augusta and the cities in the South are not probable targets. They'll try to attack some place that the country as a whole would be offended by (the ones with large amounts of whites).

You didn't make it about Augusta. You made it about me.

maybe we can get the little Indian from the old commercials to shed a ******* tear. Augusta isn't in danger, you aren't in danger. Heck, while Charlotte might be in danger because of the banking here, I'm probably not in any danger either unless I was uptown at the time of an attack.

Meanwhile, I live in Washington DC.

Does that give me any credibility on the matter? I suggest not -- because NONE of us, not even those who take public transport every day in the nation's capital, are in any way close to the danger that the fear mongers suggested they needed to protect us from in Iraq in 2002-3. The people who are in real danger are those soldiers who were sent to fight a pointless and stupid war against a country that we had successfully contained with no plan on how to succeed.

OUGwave Wrote:No, I didn't serve. But neither did the architects of this war and that didn't stop them from bungling it worse than any military operation in U.S. history.

lmfao

So says the guy that gets all his information from agenda-driven news mediums.

Rumsfeld served among others in the Administration, also Kerry was a big supporter of the War until the media aided the terrorist in making it unpopular. They tried to have George Washington fired when things got tough, same with Lincoln and Truman......maybe W. Bush is in good company here?



for the record, the FBI beleives the next "9/11" is 8 suitcase nukes going off in the 8 US cities with highest Jew Poplulations. Not sure if Charlotte is on that list or not, Bin Laden's biographer has stated he beleives the cells are here and waiting to be "awakened" on order and had the suitcase nukes here well before 9/11. I hope they are all wrong......regardless, in a Globalized economy and very connected world it affects all of us.

GGniner Wrote:Rumsfeld served among others in the Administration, also Kerry was a big supporter of the War until the media aided the terrorist in making it unpopular. They tried to have George Washington fired when things got tough, same with Lincoln and Truman......maybe W. Bush is in good company here?



for the record, the FBI beleives the next "9/11" is 8 suitcase nukes going off in the 8 US cities with highest Jew Poplulations. Not sure if Charlotte is on that list or not, Bin Laden's biographer has stated he beleives the cells are here and waiting to be "awakened" on order and had the suitcase nukes here well before 9/11. I hope they are all wrong......regardless, in a Globalized economy and very connected world it affects all of us.

Am I mistaken or weren't the Democrats just bitching a few months back about Bush needing to heed the advice of the Iraqi Study Group? The ISG stated the need for more troops, now they ***** we he tries to implement it?

How in the world can anyone follow a politician(most Democrats and some Republicans fall into this category) who changes their position at the drop of a hat?


Also, OU, I don't know your age, and it's apparent I am not going to get through to you, with all of your "knowledge" about warfare, tactics, etc., so I invite you here:

http://usmilnet.com/smf/index.php

There you can tell those idiots how it should be, how it should have been done, and what needs to be done. Trust me, they aren't as intelligent and experienced as you. I mean, we have some real dolts there. An LTC that was instrumental in the capture of Saddam Hussein, a troop that was on daily patrols hunting IEDs, a few Forward Observers, bunch of grunts, and just about every other job you can offer in the military. We have people that have been, are going, and get this, are actually on the ground. ....but I'm sure they don't hold a candle to your knowledge. [/EXTREME sarcasm]

yes, all the major Dem politicians were on record calling for a troop surge over the last couple years. There was one Congressman, can't think of name, who was calling for an increase and troops as recently as December yet as soon as Bush called for it, all of them were against it. Its all BS politics for the Dem. political gain, they are on the side of the terrorist and they are the party that is dividing this country.


just look at how the Dems were on Iraq before the media started their drumbeat. not just then but in the 1990's when Bill Clinton made REGIME CHANGE IN IRAQ, official policy of the United States.

this Surge could become a huge success and it will be portrayed as a defeat by the American Press. Just like the Tet Offensive, which therein lies the only real Vietnam parallel there is.

Most liberals don't know that Tet was, in all actuality, a victory for the US Armed Forces. The South Vietnamese sympathizers, otherwise known as the Viet Cong, were essentially destroyed during Tet. Liberals tend to think it was a huge defeat for America. Rewriting history is always essential when you have an agenda, I guess.