Author Topic: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................  (Read 16791 times)

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #75 on: May 09, 2007, 02:24:34 PM »
more for you dipshit ... read the article carefully ... while your dipshit brothers in arms are putting their lives on the line and getting killed for the war on terror, your government allowed the people shooting at them to be airlifted back to pakistan to prevent a paki civil war :)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340836/



Quote
Afghan alliance irked over Kunduz
Anti-Taliban group says airlift exposes Pakistan subterfuge

By Sean Federico-O'Murchu
MSNBC
Updated: 8:09 a.m. ET Dec 13, 2003
Dec. 15, 2001 - The Northern Alliance, the Afghan militia that controls most of the country, continues to maintain that Pakistan was allowed to airlift thousands of Pakistani troops who were fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan — with the acquiescence of the United States.

The controversial airlift from Kunduz, which reportedly took place during the siege of the northern city in late November, was further evidence of the cozy relationship between Islamabad and the former Afghan rulers, according to the alliance.

Otilie English, public affairs representative for the United Front/Northern Alliance in Washington, it was no surprise that the United States denied the airlift took place.

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The State Department “has forever been an apologist for the Pakistanis hegimonistic behavior in Afghanistan — and they continue to take their cue from them when it comes to Afghanistan,” she said.

The alliance’s Gen. Mohammed Daoud, the commander of the opposition forces that eventually seized Kunduz, said that “several” planes had landed in Kunduz airport and that “several hundred” high-echelon Pakistani officers had boarded them.

Daoud expressed anger over what he suggested was a deal between Washington and Islamabad in return for Pakistan’s support for the “war on terrorism.”

But his charge was denied by the United States. Last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld again rejected the reports.

“I have had no evidence … that there have been airplanes rescuing people or that had there been airplanes, that Pakistan had done it,” he said Thursday during the Pentagon briefing.

Pakistan has also denied any involvement. A spokesman for the embassy in Washington described the reports as a “fabrication,” disputing the accounts and noting that the only reported eyewitness was Daoud.

PAKISTAN ROLE

The dispute has highlighted some of the deep-rooted problems at issue in Afghanistan, partially obscured by the freshly minted agreement on a new broad-based government, sponsored by the United Nations.

Foremost is Pakistan’s schizophrenic role as the most important Muslim ally in the U.S.-led war on terrorism while maintaining links with the Taliban — which it nurtured since the group’s birth in 1994 — even during the waning days of its reign.

For example, The New York Times reported that twice in early October, convoys laden with rifles, ammunition and rocked-propelled grenade launchers for the Taliban drove over the border into Afghanistan.

According to the Northern Alliance’s English, Pakistan had nearly 20,000 regular troops in Afghanistan fighting alongside the Taliban.

The public affairs officer said that prisoners of war she interviewed in May, Muslims from China and Chechnya, told her that the Al-Qaida training camps were run by the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s notorious security agency.

Pakistan has rejected reports of the ISI’s involvement. “The ISI is not in the business of sending people to countries to fight other people’s wars,” the embassy spokesman said.

But for more than two decades, the ISI has been the agent of Pakistan’s Afghan policy: during the 1979-1989 Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the ISI was the CIA’s chief conduit for weapons and funding destined for the anti-Kremlin mujahedeen fighters. When the Taliban emerged from the embers of the civil war that followed the Soviet withdrawal, the ISI provided advice and logistical support that enabled the Islamic militia to handily gain control of 90 percent of the country.

In his book, “Taliban,” journalist Ahmed Rashid reported that in 1997/98 cash-strapped Pakistan paid salaries for senior members of the Taliban government as part of $30 million in aid.

At the same time, Islamabad denied supporting the hard-line Islamic regime, which was shunned by most of the world, and the focus of increased U.S. attention because of the presence there of Osama bin Laden.

THE AFTERMATH

Now three months after the terrorist attacks on the United States, Pakistan is bracing for a Kabul government that’s guaranteed to be less friendly than the Taliban.

InsertArt(1297307)Its former foe, the Northern Alliance, won a large chunk of the Cabinet posts and has shown no inclination to kiss and make up.

But Pakistan, which shares a 1,200-border with Afghanistan, will maintain a keen interest in its neighbor.

The Kunduz airlift may have scooped up the obvious remnants of its presence in Pakistan, but Islamabad has too many strategic and ethnic ties to ignore Kabul.

There also are signs that Islamabad may already have chosen its latest Afghan “partner.” According to some Alliance officials, quoted by the Times, hundreds of more Al-Qaida fighters left encircled Kunduz by pickup trucks in November.

Their protection was provided by the maverick Uzbek warlord, Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, ostensibly a member of the Northern Alliance but a wildcard in the political landscape of a future Afghanistan.

(NBC’s Jim Maceda in Kabul contributed to this story.)

© 2006 MSNBC Interactive

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #76 on: May 09, 2007, 04:26:50 PM »
U say this crap like its a reveletion..its how the game is played so what..maybe ur pissed cause i just don't care. Owned ..maybe if I cared.... ::)
L

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #77 on: May 09, 2007, 04:29:48 PM »
I'm done the Red Sox are on...glad to pick this up tommorrow if u can cut the I owned u shit.
L

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #78 on: May 09, 2007, 06:03:15 PM »
how can it not be a revelation when 4 posts ago you denied such an airlift took place?

if it isnt obvious by now, im just trying to show everyone what an idiot you are ... i know youll never change your mind but at least i can entertain myself in the process :)

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #79 on: May 09, 2007, 07:23:59 PM »
how can it not be a revelation when 4 posts ago you denied such an airlift took place?

if it isnt obvious by now, im just trying to show everyone what an idiot you are ... i know youll never change your mind but at least i can entertain myself in the process :)

You haven't shown much of anything.

CT sites are not mainstream.  And references from far left media who do nothing more than exaggerate small shortcomings from this admin certainly don't add much honesty in reporting either.

And OF COURSE we had a plan to invade Iraq long before it happened.  Anyone in the DOD knows we have plans to invade all kinds of countries... it's called contingency. 

And as far as WMD's go I suggest you look at Saddams interactions with UN weapons inspectors a little more closely.  Try reading between the lines (like it's difficult) and come up with your own conclusion.  Secondly, for all those "idiots" putting their life on the line for something I think you should at least consider some of the things we saw first hand as well as the information we were priviledged to.  You think some of us might know something you wouldn't?

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #80 on: May 09, 2007, 09:42:37 PM »
msnbc = not a "CT site"

bbc = not a "CT site"

janes = not a "CT site"

and any site that reported on 911 is by definition a ct site (19 arabs with boxcutters is a CT dipshit) .. therefore you gotta ignore fox, cnn, abc, nbc etc etc ::)

you and headhunter are stupid, so im not too concerned with what youve seen cause you dont have the capacity to understand it :)


Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #82 on: May 09, 2007, 09:51:48 PM »
msnbc = not a "CT site"

bbc = not a "CT site"

janes = not a "CT site"

and any site that reported on 911 is by definition a ct site (19 arabs with boxcutters is a CT dipshit) .. therefore you gotta ignore fox, cnn, abc, nbc etc etc ::)

you and headhunter are stupid, so im not too concerned with what youve seen cause you dont have the capacity to understand it :)

Looks like you're more interested in trying to make someone angry than actually exposing the obvious truths and winning the argument.

I guess calling us stupid makes it easier for you to ignore the facts... so have fun with that.

C'mon buddy don't be an ass... I think we all understand when a source is simply spreading conspiracy theories versus reporting accurately on one.

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #83 on: May 09, 2007, 09:58:49 PM »
refresh my memory, what WMD's were found in iraq?

refresh my memory, what came of the saddam/911 link?

and whats the terrorism situation like in iraq these days v pre invasion?

.

again more stupidity from you ... type something thats halfway intelligent and i wont call you a dipshit

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #84 on: May 09, 2007, 10:09:52 PM »
refresh my memory, what WMD's were found in iraq?

refresh my memory, what came of the saddam/911 link?

and whats the terrorism situation like in iraq these days v pre invasion?

.

again more stupidity from you ... type something thats halfway intelligent and i wont call you a dipshit

Saddam/911... not even close to being necessary in the case for war.  And also... see above links.

WMD's... an intelligence failure but given the history and behavior of saddam at the time it was likely.  As well as what happened to the weapons he DID have.. something else 99% of the world doesn't know.  And also... see above.

If anyone other than Bush had gone to war with Iraq or any other country after what had been happening no one would be saying anything including yourself.  You've bought into a bucket of shit and doubt you'll ever have the courage to see anything for what it is.

Maybe you should ask yourself whether we would rather fight terrorists in Iraq with soldiers or would you rather be the victims of terrorism here at home.

And you call me stupid.. ha!

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #85 on: May 09, 2007, 10:24:44 PM »
every time i think you cant get any dumber you prove me wrong

the war was specifically sold to the world on account of the WMD's and the saddam/911 link

both of which were known by the administration to be bullshit as the real reason for the war was imperialism

the fact you dont recognize this is why i will continue to call you a dipshit, a retard, a moron, stupid ... basically a good soldier

eat a bullet before you pass on those genes

cheers

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #86 on: May 09, 2007, 10:39:08 PM »
every time i think you cant get any dumber you prove me wrong

the war was specifically sold to the world on account of the WMD's and the saddam/911 link

both of which were known by the administration to be bullshit as the real reason for the war was imperialism

the fact you dont recognize this is why i will continue to call you a dipshit, a retard, a moron, stupid ... basically a good soldier

eat a bullet before you pass on those genes

cheers

Those were two of MANY reasons to invade.  And any ONE of those reasons were good enough.  On a level of importance the Saddam/911 wasn't even close to the top and the link was remote at best.  Maybe you should stop thinking about why Bush wanted to go there and start thinking about WHY it was best to destroy Iraq to begin with.

You're just towing the party line by stating that those two reasons which proved to be not factors were the ONLY reasons to be there.  Don't ignore the whole story.  I realize that would force you to admit yourself to be too biased to look at anything objectively but I guess that's what people do when they can't win with facts.

And just to throw this in there... I've noticed anyone trying to call the US activity in Iraq as "imperialism" has never thought too fondly of military action of any kind let alone been capable of understanding what it means to serve in an army/navy, etc.  I would bet pinks that any one of the guys in my division were more intelligent and had better judgement and objectivity than you're vaginal whining.

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #87 on: May 09, 2007, 10:46:24 PM »
Although it's an editorial it gets my point across.  Remember pussy, if we had invaded any other country around the world for committing the following transgressions under any other president you wouldn't have you're lips soldiered to some leftists chocolate starfish right now.

http://www.randomjottings.net/archives/002558.html

1. Avoid fizzle-out. The big danger of a war against shadowy terror groups is that they can destroy our resolve to fight by pretending to negotiate or change their ways. By attacking the very heartland of the Arab world, we will avoid the cycle of truces and negotiations that have crippled Israel's war on its terrorists. The jihadis MUST fight for Iraq, the stakes will be too high. They won't be able to just lie low for a few years and then strike again. We will be forcing them to react to our moves, instead of us always reacting to theirs—this should really be a reason by itself.

2. Until the culture of despotism and backwardness of the Arab world is changed, new terrorist groups will continue to arise. Iraq is the best choice for starting the process of change, with a well-educated population that has suffered terribly from tyranny. Changing Iraq will change the dialog in the region. Deposing tyrants is a start, but there are good reasons to believe that democracy might take hold in Iraq—That would really change the region.

3.Terror-supporting nations. We can't make progress in changing them, until we take out ONE of them. Iraq is a good choice because we already have a good legal case, with many binding UN Resolutions, plus Iraq's failure to comply with peace-terms from the Gulf War. And also because Saddam is the most considerable of the terror-supporting dictators, so his fall will have the biggest effect on the others.

4. Iran: The most important instance of the above is Iran (which is the worst of the terror-supporting countries). The Mullahs can't close off their border with Ira, because their Shi'ite Holy Places are there. Invasion of Iraq puts an army right on Iran's border. And Iraqi Shi'ism, impotent under Saddam, does not agree with theocratic Iranian Shi'ism. We need its ideas to flourish.

5. The humanitarian reasons are compelling. Tens-of-thousands of people are being tortured and murdered in Iraq each year. This is an internal war--to end it is to be on the side of peace. The UN sanctions regime has left children dying without food and medicine, while Saddam builds palaces and funds terror groups and corrupts Western governments with kickbacks. And we are INVOLVED in the sanctions perversion--we have a responsibility to end it. Saddam is waging an internal war against his people. Pacifists are enablers of Saddam's war and want it to go on forever—America should end it.

6. Similarly, we bear responsibility for encouraging the Shi'ite revolt against Saddam after the Gulf War. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were slaughtered because of our mistakes. We should have moved against Saddam years ago for that reason alone.

7. WMD's: a danger that must be eliminated. (Note from the perspective of 2006: While it's true we haven't found large stockpiles, we've found weapons programs that could have quickly rebuilt stockpiles. And more importantly, this is a war. A global war against islamic terrorism. Not a case at law. The mere appearance of plans to attack us or our allies is justification for an attack. In a war, it is our responsibility to attack an enemy nation if feasable. It is those who oppose war-like attacks during war time who bear the responsibility of providing reasons why we should not.)

8. We have partly created the terrorists, by consistent weakness and vacillation over several decades. We have taught the terrorists to attack us! Withdrawing from Lebanon taught Hezbollah that suicide bombs work. Failure to respond in the Iran hostage crises taught a generation of terrorists that we are weak and vulnerable. Withdrawal from Somalia taught bin Laden that we can't take casualties. We have waited so long to respond, that only a long bloody struggle will teach them a new lesson. If Iraq becomes a quagmire, that's good. Assuming we stick it out and win.

9. Diplomacy. Obviously it is best to solve problems peacefully by diplomacy and negotiations. But our diplomacy has been crippled by lack of a credible threat of violence as an alternative. This dates from our betrayal of South Vietnam, and is exacerbated by the decline of most other Western powers into military impotence. Diplomacy works as the "good cop" alternative to a military "bad cop." Our failure in this has been so great that it could only be redeemed by some seriously crazy violence. Iraq--perfect! Now Colin Powell's "good cop" will be contrasted with a really scary "bad cop" named Donald Rumsfeld. Expect big diplomatic payoffs.

10. Consensus of elected leaders. President Bush has requested approval for the invasion of Iraq from Congress. The Senate debated the question and voted overwhelmingly in favor. Our nation made this decision. We made the decision. That's a powerful reason in favor. [Note from 2006: For various people, including some of the Senators who voted for this campaign, to now sit on the sidelines and whine, "I don't know anything about this and nobody told me anything and it has nothing to do with me" is despicable.]

11. To learn how to fight this new kind of war. There has never been a war like this before. We need to learn how to fight it, and keep learning as enemy tactics evolve. There's no other way to learn than just plunging in and fighting. Armchair strategists are not much help. And Iraq is big enough to blood the entire US Army and Marine Corps, without being very dangerous (by historical standards, that is. Think Shiloh, or the Meuse-Argonne Campaign).

12. Revenge. Saddam and al Qaeda have been responsible for the terror-killings of American citizens, including American diplomats. These murders have gone unpunished. It was wrong for us not to avenge them violently. (I'm using the term "revenge" provocatively, to irritate appeasers. But feel free to toss out the concept of vengeance. it is still wrong, both morally and logically, to allow criminals to flourish and prosper through their crimes, and to prey on the weak. It is a sin.)

13. Archives. Totalitarian regimes always keep good records. We are going to learn a lot about what's really been going on in the world once we get into the files. (Me, I'd scan everything and put it on the Web.)

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #88 on: May 09, 2007, 10:49:47 PM »
Shit.. number 5 alone is enough to have stomped Saddams guts out.  If you have any independent thoughts in your puny Canadian head at all you will agree with this one.

Let's try to remain objective here.

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #89 on: May 09, 2007, 10:53:05 PM »
Those were two of MANY reasons to invade.  And any ONE of those reasons were good enough.  On a level of importance the Saddam/911 wasn't even close to the top and the link was remote at best.  Maybe you should stop thinking about why Bush wanted to go there and start thinking about WHY it was best to destroy Iraq to begin with.

You're just towing the party line by stating that those two reasons which proved to be not factors were the ONLY reasons to be there.  Don't ignore the whole story.  I realize that would force you to admit yourself to be too biased to look at anything objectively but I guess that's what people do when they can't win with facts.

And just to throw this in there... I've noticed anyone trying to call the US activity in Iraq as "imperialism" has never thought too fondly of military action of any kind let alone been capable of understanding what it means to serve in an army/navy, etc.  I would bet pinks that any one of the guys in my division were more intelligent and had better judgement and objectivity than you're vaginal whining.

did you go to university? does not sound like it cause you have problems adding substantiative points to an argument ... nobody is interested in your opinions, if you want to be compelling you need relevant points

you have a short memory ... the war was sold to congress, the public and the rest of the world (while to your allies; we all know amreeka buct the UN thus violating international law and your own constitution) based on WMD's and the saddam/911 link, both of which were complete bullshit

once again, you are talking utter bullshit to make up for the fact you have no foot to stand on ... the pre invasion polls showed that over half of amreeka believed there was a strong saddam/911 link (look it up) and that saddams WMD's were a threat to amreeka

they werent

and the CIA analysts were screaming that to the deaf ears of an administration hell bent on war


soldiers are made for dying, not thinking so you should stick to what you are good at...

anyone with half a brain could tell you the war was really about imperialism, which means keeping your empire afloat ... in fact zbigniew brzezinski (you know, carters national security adviser and a CFR member http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski) said so back in 1997 when he wrote the grand chess board ... and he, like myself, is smarter than you and everyone else you serve with :)



vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #90 on: May 09, 2007, 11:00:08 PM »
Although it's an editorial it gets my point across.  Remember pussy, if we had invaded any other country around the world for committing the following transgressions under any other president you wouldn't have you're lips soldiered to some leftists chocolate starfish right now.

http://www.randomjottings.net/archives/002558.html

1. Avoid fizzle-out. The big danger of a war against shadowy terror groups is that they can destroy our resolve to fight by pretending to negotiate or change their ways. By attacking the very heartland of the Arab world, we will avoid the cycle of truces and negotiations that have crippled Israel's war on its terrorists. The jihadis MUST fight for Iraq, the stakes will be too high. They won't be able to just lie low for a few years and then strike again. We will be forcing them to react to our moves, instead of us always reacting to theirs—this should really be a reason by itself.

2. Until the culture of despotism and backwardness of the Arab world is changed, new terrorist groups will continue to arise. Iraq is the best choice for starting the process of change, with a well-educated population that has suffered terribly from tyranny. Changing Iraq will change the dialog in the region. Deposing tyrants is a start, but there are good reasons to believe that democracy might take hold in Iraq—That would really change the region.

3.Terror-supporting nations. We can't make progress in changing them, until we take out ONE of them. Iraq is a good choice because we already have a good legal case, with many binding UN Resolutions, plus Iraq's failure to comply with peace-terms from the Gulf War. And also because Saddam is the most considerable of the terror-supporting dictators, so his fall will have the biggest effect on the others.

4. Iran: The most important instance of the above is Iran (which is the worst of the terror-supporting countries). The Mullahs can't close off their border with Ira, because their Shi'ite Holy Places are there. Invasion of Iraq puts an army right on Iran's border. And Iraqi Shi'ism, impotent under Saddam, does not agree with theocratic Iranian Shi'ism. We need its ideas to flourish.

5. The humanitarian reasons are compelling. Tens-of-thousands of people are being tortured and murdered in Iraq each year. This is an internal war--to end it is to be on the side of peace. The UN sanctions regime has left children dying without food and medicine, while Saddam builds palaces and funds terror groups and corrupts Western governments with kickbacks. And we are INVOLVED in the sanctions perversion--we have a responsibility to end it. Saddam is waging an internal war against his people. Pacifists are enablers of Saddam's war and want it to go on forever—America should end it.

6. Similarly, we bear responsibility for encouraging the Shi'ite revolt against Saddam after the Gulf War. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were slaughtered because of our mistakes. We should have moved against Saddam years ago for that reason alone.

7. WMD's: a danger that must be eliminated. (Note from the perspective of 2006: While it's true we haven't found large stockpiles, we've found weapons programs that could have quickly rebuilt stockpiles. And more importantly, this is a war. A global war against islamic terrorism. Not a case at law. The mere appearance of plans to attack us or our allies is justification for an attack. In a war, it is our responsibility to attack an enemy nation if feasable. It is those who oppose war-like attacks during war time who bear the responsibility of providing reasons why we should not.)

8. We have partly created the terrorists, by consistent weakness and vacillation over several decades. We have taught the terrorists to attack us! Withdrawing from Lebanon taught Hezbollah that suicide bombs work. Failure to respond in the Iran hostage crises taught a generation of terrorists that we are weak and vulnerable. Withdrawal from Somalia taught bin Laden that we can't take casualties. We have waited so long to respond, that only a long bloody struggle will teach them a new lesson. If Iraq becomes a quagmire, that's good. Assuming we stick it out and win.

9. Diplomacy. Obviously it is best to solve problems peacefully by diplomacy and negotiations. But our diplomacy has been crippled by lack of a credible threat of violence as an alternative. This dates from our betrayal of South Vietnam, and is exacerbated by the decline of most other Western powers into military impotence. Diplomacy works as the "good cop" alternative to a military "bad cop." Our failure in this has been so great that it could only be redeemed by some seriously crazy violence. Iraq--perfect! Now Colin Powell's "good cop" will be contrasted with a really scary "bad cop" named Donald Rumsfeld. Expect big diplomatic payoffs.

10. Consensus of elected leaders. President Bush has requested approval for the invasion of Iraq from Congress. The Senate debated the question and voted overwhelmingly in favor. Our nation made this decision. We made the decision. That's a powerful reason in favor. [Note from 2006: For various people, including some of the Senators who voted for this campaign, to now sit on the sidelines and whine, "I don't know anything about this and nobody told me anything and it has nothing to do with me" is despicable.]

11. To learn how to fight this new kind of war. There has never been a war like this before. We need to learn how to fight it, and keep learning as enemy tactics evolve. There's no other way to learn than just plunging in and fighting. Armchair strategists are not much help. And Iraq is big enough to blood the entire US Army and Marine Corps, without being very dangerous (by historical standards, that is. Think Shiloh, or the Meuse-Argonne Campaign).

12. Revenge. Saddam and al Qaeda have been responsible for the terror-killings of American citizens, including American diplomats. These murders have gone unpunished. It was wrong for us not to avenge them violently. (I'm using the term "revenge" provocatively, to irritate appeasers. But feel free to toss out the concept of vengeance. it is still wrong, both morally and logically, to allow criminals to flourish and prosper through their crimes, and to prey on the weak. It is a sin.)

13. Archives. Totalitarian regimes always keep good records. We are going to learn a lot about what's really been going on in the world once we get into the files. (Me, I'd scan everything and put it on the Web.)

those points are laughable ...

how many people did your sanctions kill?
how many people have been killed and tortured under the sectarian violence?
v
how many people did saddam torture and kill?

::)

what was the terrorism situation in SECULAR iraq like before the invasion?
v
what is it like now?

::)

diplomacy? ... ask the weapons inspectors who ordered them out, it wasnt saddam ;)

::)

culture of despotism, changing the dialogue of the region ... again how STUPID can you be ... what has this war done to that region ... took a relitavely stable iraq and plunged it into chaos

.

i do appreciate that you quoted somoene more intelligent than yourself, but that person is stilla fool and their points may be enough to convince a soldier to lay down his worthless lower class life ... but anyone who paid attention in jr high and onwards should know better

:)


gtbro1

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6893
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #91 on: May 10, 2007, 04:36:13 AM »
 SO.....How about them Colts,huh?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #92 on: May 10, 2007, 05:14:05 AM »
VP makes a good point...

everything you chalk up to "mistakes" or "incompetence" or "misconception" all coincidentally fit the plan from 94 and the PNAC 2000 document. 

Every time.  They all serve the master plan we all read a decade ago.  I don't blame military folks lik briz and hh6 for not wanting to believe it.  The collective work of their life would amount to nothing more than dodging bullets and killing for an imperialist machine.  I support it cause I have the balls to face it.  They don't have the balls.  SO, they go with "coincidence!" no matter how statistically impossible and they countinue to add up.

FUck it.  You guys go play in the sand and do what you do.  DOn't look at the evidence - not everyone is designed to be thinkers.  Some folks' purpose is nothing more than to serve something greater than them they'll never understand.  Go at it fellahs.  WMD, fairy dust, whatever belief gets you thru the day.  You mock evidence you don't understand because it's part of your Beta status (huxley?).  You keep throwing insults at the mental alphas for tlaking about things you dont understand.

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #93 on: May 10, 2007, 07:09:57 AM »
exactly

i dont really care that a bunch of brown people ill never meet are dying, and i care even less about a bunch of dipshits who think they are bringing freedom to the world

what does bother me is when people dont acknowledge the obvious ... i HATE stupidity >:(

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #94 on: May 10, 2007, 07:14:47 AM »
SO.....How about them Colts,huh?

Ur not winning this year............ :P
L

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #95 on: May 10, 2007, 07:15:28 AM »
the war was sold to congress, the public and the rest of the world (while to your allies; we all know amreeka buct the UN thus violating international law and your own constitution) based on WMD's and the saddam/911 link, both of which were complete bullshit

True.

The idea of the invasion was "pitched" to UN and the American public, and the rest of the world, on the premise that there were WMD's.

There weren't any.

Can't argue that.

-Hedge
As empty as paradise

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #96 on: May 10, 2007, 07:23:49 AM »
iTs old news at this point...I'd love for someone to find a bunch of crap in Syria but at this point..Saddam was a bad guy and had to go..and we completely blew the occupation. i think that baout sums up where we are at.
L

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #97 on: May 10, 2007, 07:44:25 AM »
you didnt blow shit ... if there was no insurgency there would be no excuse to stay there and to have your 14 permanent bases built ... and the invasion of iran would be oh so much harder

even a low level dipshit like you must notice that you now have iran flanked ... ask your CO why thats important ::)

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #98 on: May 10, 2007, 07:57:17 AM »
I will... he took over for Petreus when he left to go run the war....low level  ::). U live in a basement. I'm done..ur an assmonkey.
L

vikingpower

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 913
Re: IT'S A PRETTY SAD SITUATION WHEN...................
« Reply #99 on: May 10, 2007, 08:25:22 AM »
how sad it is for your army that a non low level IED magnet like yourself gets slapped around intellectually by a kid who lives ina basement (which btw is worth more than your house :D)