(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

From WMD:

Quote:I agree the Stryker is one hell of a IFV, but the areas where the Taliban and AQ are holed up inside of Afghanistan are more of the terrain of Operation Anaconda. If CENTCOM wanted to put a real hurt on the Taliban, I'd suggest paying off the tribesmen farmers and then dropping napalm on every poppy field between Kandahar and Herat.

Take away their internal funding and you might get intelligence on where the high value targets are.

Yeah that, and give them crops to supplant the ones they are using. Maybe get their raisin plantations up and running again.

Oh, BTW, Hi from Saipan!!:patriot:

Peleliu was much worse than Saipan and Tinian. Even though is was supposed to be the easiest.

BTW, whether they're useful or not, I can't imagine the Obama administration ever refusing a request for heavy armor when it comes from the field. Memories of Les Aspin and Blackhawk Down should still run deep and make a considerable impression - especially given how critical some of these regions are in our current climate.

(02-18-2009 09:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The sooner we quit trying to micromanage the world, the sooner we'll see fewer Afghanistans and 9/11's. Of course we probably will need to get off our imported oil fix before we can quit micromanaging at least that part of the world.

This.

The rest of this thread is the equivalent of a masturbatory exercise for grown men that still wanna play GI Joe.

(02-19-2009 11:26 AM)Artifice Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 09:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The sooner we quit trying to micromanage the world, the sooner we'll see fewer Afghanistans and 9/11's. Of course we probably will need to get off our imported oil fix before we can quit micromanaging at least that part of the world.

This.
The rest of this thread is the equivalent of a masturbatory exercise for grown men that still wanna play GI Joe.

And it's even worse when the leaders are draft dodgers.

(02-19-2009 11:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 11:26 AM)Artifice Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 09:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The sooner we quit trying to micromanage the world, the sooner we'll see fewer Afghanistans and 9/11's. Of course we probably will need to get off our imported oil fix before we can quit micromanaging at least that part of the world.

This.
The rest of this thread is the equivalent of a masturbatory exercise for grown men that still wanna play GI Joe.

And it's even worse when the leaders are draft dodgers.

Obama is the first President that never really faced the prospect of being Drafted.

(02-19-2009 11:26 AM)Artifice Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 09:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The sooner we quit trying to micromanage the world, the sooner we'll see fewer Afghanistans and 9/11's. Of course we probably will need to get off our imported oil fix before we can quit micromanaging at least that part of the world.

This.

The rest of this thread is the equivalent of a masturbatory exercise for grown men that still wanna play GI Joe.

Perhaps i shouldn't, but I must say I'm a bit offended by this.

I don't want to play GI Joe... but I'm the first of my family in ten generations that didn't... and its because of my father's experience in Vietnam and thereafter. Politicians turned the military into the world's equivalent of a school hall monitor... only the other students have bombs strapped to their chest, and though you're carrying the more sophisticated weapon and training, you have to make sure that you won't offend anyone who might even HEAR about you discharging that weapon before doing so... while the student can simply jump out and say "boo(m)".

The same argument is made in gun control, only those who are making it don't listen to themselves... When you don't treat a weapon with the respect that it deserves as a weapon, you place everyone around you in danger. When you use a weapon for any purpose other than its intended use, you place those around you in danger. The military was designed to fight wars. It was designed to defend or acquire territory... It was designed to ELIMINATE aggression, not to absorb it.

BECAUSE we are trying to be hall monitors (micro-managers), we are failing to treat our most dangerous weapon known as our military with the respect it deserves and asking it to do a service it was not designed for. We are using a gun as a hammer... a knife as a screwdriver... and then blaming the tool when we cut ourselves.

If the politicians would follow THIS simple advice... If you don't want it dead... don't pull out your gun (the military)... there would be far fewer uses (and abuses) of our military. Walk softly and carry a big stick... just don't go waving that stick at every mosquito you pass.... save it until you're face to face with a grizzly, and if your life is at stake, kill it.

(02-19-2009 01:09 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Walk softly and carry a big stick... just don't go waving that stick at every mosquito you pass.... save it until you're face to face with a grizzly, and if your life is at stake, kill it.

I don't know exactly how many generations my family goes back being GI Joe's. I know that it goes back as far as William Wallace, and I'm pretty sure that it goes back as far as William the Conqueror (different line). I also know that my son is the first in many generations not to, and I'm very happy with his decision.

I stayed in the reserves until retirement, but I left active duty when I realized that being in uniform meant, in the words of a State Department employee that I worked with in Saudi in the 70s, "You guys are the erasers for our mistakes." As a reservist, I was well aware that I was still subject to being pressed into service as an eraser, but it would take a much bigger mistake to require my services in that role.

Read my signature. Never fight a war you don't intend to win. We made that mistake in Vietnam, in Somalia, in the Balkans, and in Iraq, to name a few.

I'm right there with you Owl, right down to the famous military ancestor, but I'm the oldest male in the extended family not to serve. All 7 uncles, my dad, both grandfathers, and several generations before that. All of them active duty, no reservists. And I'd have to tell you that to a man, they all wanted me to stay out for pretty much the same reason you stated.

Our military is being misappropriated and missused to further ideologue foreign policy. It's a travesty and an insult to the brave men and women in uniform. And, it isn't lost on me that a majority of the hawkish types aren't willing to put their own and their children's butts on the line for that same foreign policy ideology.

(02-18-2009 08:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

(02-19-2009 07:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 08:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

I would concur...but..Clearly we have overstepped that line many times. Obviously treaties with other nations have lead to some of these instances. Some of the founders warned us about entangling alliances.
I'm not for isolationism..but..the prudent use of force when we are directly threatened. Much of what we currently do around the world is a zero sum game and could be prudently scaled back without danger to US security. I really don't like our troops being put in situations where they are put into "peace keeping" duties that tie their hands behind them. That is NOT what they are supposed to be trained to do...IMHO.

Well we have 3 Global Hawk UAV's at an Airbase in Pakistan.

(02-19-2009 07:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 08:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

Ok... Are you ready to take the heat for potentially killing innocents over it?

If so, call the military and get out of the way. If not, then call for a political summit.

Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but as an example... If we're not ready to take the political heat for bombing a supposed nuclear factory in Iran posing as a milk factory, then put the gun down. If we are, then do it. No posturing, no threats... just simple yes and no questions from those in charge... kind of like they do on a NASA launch... group one, go flight... group 2, go flight... group 3 etc etc. None of this, well, if we can do it in such a manner as to yada yada yada. If its not yes, then don't send in the military.

Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

Logisitcs for allied forces deployed to Afghanistan just got a little tougher... Putin has infulenced the President of Kyrgystan to throw US forces out of the aibase there at Mantas, also known as "K2".

USAF construction crews better hurry up and build Bagram out, because we are going to need a bigger base.

BISHKEK (Reuters) – Kyrgyzstan's Foreign Ministry said on Friday it had sent the United States ambassador a formal notice demanding Washington close its military air base in the country and giving U.S. troops 180 days to pack up and leave.

"Today, on February 20, the note... was sent by Minister (Kadyrbek) Sarbayev to U.S. Ambassador Tatiana Gfoeller," the ministry said in a statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090220/wl_n...gyzstan_us

(02-20-2009 09:48 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 07:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 08:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

Ok... Are you ready to take the heat for potentially killing innocents over it?

If so, call the military and get out of the way. If not, then call for a political summit.

Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but as an example... If we're not ready to take the political heat for bombing a supposed nuclear factory in Iran posing as a milk factory, then put the gun down. If we are, then do it. No posturing, no threats... just simple yes and no questions from those in charge... kind of like they do on a NASA launch... group one, go flight... group 2, go flight... group 3 etc etc. None of this, well, if we can do it in such a manner as to yada yada yada. If its not yes, then don't send in the military.

Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

Or would you rather have 6 million dead Jews?

(02-20-2009 02:04 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 09:48 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 02:04 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

Ok... Are you ready to take the heat for potentially killing innocents over it?

If so, call the military and get out of the way. If not, then call for a political summit.

Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but as an example... If we're not ready to take the political heat for bombing a supposed nuclear factory in Iran posing as a milk factory, then put the gun down. If we are, then do it. No posturing, no threats... just simple yes and no questions from those in charge... kind of like they do on a NASA launch... group one, go flight... group 2, go flight... group 3 etc etc. None of this, well, if we can do it in such a manner as to yada yada yada. If its not yes, then don't send in the military.

Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

Or would you rather have 6 million dead Jews?

I think perhaps you miss my point, or I miss yours.

My interpretation of Clinton's famous "Is" is argument was that he was parsing details in order to avoid answering the much more simple question... The arguments before the UN were the same thing in my mind. If we can't agree on what constitutes a failure to comply... on what "IS" or "SEX" is, then we sure aren't going to agree on what to do about the non-compliance... especially when the non-compliance was to the direct benefit of some of those we were trying to convince to do something about it.

To me, the simple question was... were they complying with the cease-fire... and I can't imagine one person who could rationally argue that they were.... especially in that Hans Blix, the UN inspector said they weren't... so, the original justification, which everyone seemed okay with... STILL stands.

Now... we can ask the question... is the non-compliance worth killing people over... but we don't have to justify that to the world.

Its like when we talk about killing someone who breaks into your house. If they don't break in, then I don't have to decide whether or not to kill them. If you don't want to take the risk that I make a poor decision, then don't break in my house. Faulting me for making a bad decision after the fact is fine... I can live with that... because YOU forced me to make the decision.

(02-20-2009 02:04 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 09:48 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-19-2009 07:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 08:00 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 06:46 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 05:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-18-2009 12:30 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  We just need to let the military do what we trained them to do. Period. When you constrain our military, you strengthen our enemies. When you give our military a mission, they don't know anything but success. It's really quite simple.

OK...Bring them home and put them to defending.

a Marine once told me... I didn't train to be a nanny... I trained to be a killer. If you don't want it dead, don't call me. If you DO want it dead, get out of my way and let me do it. It will be quick, efficient and over. War is not neat, and never has been. War is not pretty. War is war, and we fight to win or die... EVERY time.

It's a shame that our leaders have essentially made our military men an women...."nannies of the world". I agree...They are paid killers, and I'm glad that they have volunteered for that. I just feel that those in power are using them way too much as pawns for their own political goals instead of using them for their intended purpose....Defense.

Define Defense. Even preemptive actions can be defensive in nature..

Ok... Are you ready to take the heat for potentially killing innocents over it?

If so, call the military and get out of the way. If not, then call for a political summit.

Obviously I'm oversimplifying, but as an example... If we're not ready to take the political heat for bombing a supposed nuclear factory in Iran posing as a milk factory, then put the gun down. If we are, then do it. No posturing, no threats... just simple yes and no questions from those in charge... kind of like they do on a NASA launch... group one, go flight... group 2, go flight... group 3 etc etc. None of this, well, if we can do it in such a manner as to yada yada yada. If its not yes, then don't send in the military.

Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

Or would you rather have 6 million dead Jews?

Hell...Ill bite.

I would not rather have any dead people...period...Jews included.

I will fully admit though that I feel that what happens there is not my affair and I have no desire to defend Israel or any other country. I'm for defending the US(and yes..that includes against eminent threats). I have no problem in helping with diplomatic efforts to keep peace and humanitarian aid...but..really that's all. Enough of the entangling alliances! I fully understand that is probably not a mainstream view.

(02-20-2009 09:48 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

I disagree with your premise here. His legal justification was violation of the peace treaty. Motives are a much more complicated thing in a world where terrorism is a tool exploited by states like Iran and Iraq. I think the invasion had much more to do with putting an end to the use of terrorism as a tool of states like these as opposed to just exposing them to the use of WMD as a tool.

(02-21-2009 12:02 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(02-20-2009 09:48 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Bush's ONLY reason for invading Iraq was that he was in violation of the peace treaty that suspended GWI... If we weren't foing to enforce the treaty, then what good was it?? The was is back on... end of story. WMD or whatever was a military target, not a justification. If people weren't willing to get on board with that, we should have resigned from the UN. End of discussion. I don't put my family at risk so that others can control the situation.

I disagree with your premise here. His legal justification was violation of the peace treaty. Motives are a much more complicated thing in a world where terrorism is a tool exploited by states like Iran and Iraq. I think the invasion had much more to do with putting an end to the use of terrorism as a tool of states like these as opposed to just exposing them to the use of WMD as a tool.

I think you misunderstood my premise then... party because I clearly can't type... because you say what I meant to say.... eloquence is clearly an art.

The only reason Bush NEEDED to go back into Iraq was the violation of the cease-fire. End of discussion. The other arguments were unnecessary, and not likely to change the minds of those who weren't already supporting us in the "violation" argument... , and actually hurt us rather than helped us. We came up with thousands of "possibilities", many of which turned out to be wrong... and we looked bad as a result... but they were only educated conjecture.