- Joined
- Jul 11, 2001
- Messages
- 743
IRAQ
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
4.
5.
-
Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
Click here to visit! here...
IRAQ
- Thread starter Sam The Man
- Start date
Allofus123
Here ducky, ducky, ducky!
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2001
- Messages
- 3,867
That was funny Sam! 
I didn't completely agree with any one answer but didn't "not" agree either except for #2.
My vote is we tell him exactly how the rabbits going to eat the cabbage and if the rabbit so much as looks at a carrot without permission let him die where he stands. No if, ands, or buts.
I didn't completely agree with any one answer but didn't "not" agree either except for #2.
My vote is we tell him exactly how the rabbits going to eat the cabbage and if the rabbit so much as looks at a carrot without permission let him die where he stands. No if, ands, or buts.
JOE.M.
The biggest pair you have ever seen!
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2002
- Messages
- 3,064
Sam, you are a man of many talents! All though I think we should have taken him out along time ago......better late than never ..... As Denis Miller would say "I don't want to go on a rant here but" I also think our nation can do a lot of good with the 200 billion they are projecting the war will cost, like use it to stabilize our economy, help the homeless, stem sell research {because you know that re-working the DNA of plants and animals so we can produce more food to feed the world is much more acceptable than using stem cell research to save or restore life to those who suffer is much more important!} Oh yea, and of course they could use the money to find cures for the many deadly diseases plaguing our society!!!!! Ok, I’m ok.......
..... As Denis Miller would say "I don't want to go on a rant here but" I also think our nation can do a lot of good with the 200 billion they are projecting the war will cost, like use it to stabilize our economy, help the homeless, stem sell research {because you know that re-working the DNA of plants and animals so we can produce more food to feed the world is much more acceptable than using stem cell research to save or restore life to those who suffer is much more important!} Oh yea, and of course they could use the money to find cures for the many deadly diseases plaguing our society!!!!! Ok, I’m ok.......I hear something the other day. I couldn't quote it so I will paraphrase it:
We need a war or conflict every few years. Why you ask?!
To keep our fighting men and women in shape. Wargames and drills are all fine and dandy but nothing beats the expereince from a war.
We would not want to go to war with green or unexperienced troops.
I heard that from my college American History teacher when he was talking about U.S. wars and conflicts. I wasn't sure I agreed with him at first but then when I thought about it. It did make sense.
We need a war or conflict every few years. Why you ask?!
To keep our fighting men and women in shape. Wargames and drills are all fine and dandy but nothing beats the expereince from a war.
We would not want to go to war with green or unexperienced troops.
I heard that from my college American History teacher when he was talking about U.S. wars and conflicts. I wasn't sure I agreed with him at first but then when I thought about it. It did make sense.
Smokin'Tone
I just might be your huckleberry
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 1,193
I think it's all a grab for oil. Bush since coming in has done nothing good for this country. After Sept 11, he sent in troops to get Osama, can't get him, so he turns back to Iraq to clean up his daddy's screw up. Now, Clinton had a chance to get them both and he didn't, so I think in Bush's head, this is his way of getting into history, because he's not going to do much else.
To make matters worse, 200 billion towards a war is a waste. Send in a few small troops and snipe that bastards head right off his shoulders. As far as Afghanistan, I want to see in 10 years if anything's changed, or if more fundamentalists come in and screw it up. We should be out there trying to make peace with the world, not piss it off, because there are an awful lot of people that hate America and would dance in the street if it's our fault that our own stupidity started WW3.
To make matters worse, 200 billion towards a war is a waste. Send in a few small troops and snipe that bastards head right off his shoulders. As far as Afghanistan, I want to see in 10 years if anything's changed, or if more fundamentalists come in and screw it up. We should be out there trying to make peace with the world, not piss it off, because there are an awful lot of people that hate America and would dance in the street if it's our fault that our own stupidity started WW3.
As a person that was a participant in Gulf War 1, I think we should have resolved this problem then. And I disagree with the comment about sending troops to war just so they are fit for future battles. Did this college professor ever serve in the military? Also, the military is only an instrument that's used by politicians to make other countries bend to the will of the U.S. I'm not a war-monger, however, I'm with the President on this one.
McPatrickClan
McPatrickClan
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 562
Smokin said:
McPatrickClan
McPatrickClan
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 562
[quote name='Smokin'Tone' date='Oct 5 2002, 11:07 AM']We should be out there trying to make peace with the world, not piss it off[/quote]
By our actions, are we "trying" to piss off the world? It's a lot easier to do what Germany and France are doing than what we are doing. We will sustain casualties and give up innocent American blood to save their countries! If we took a strict isolationist policy, we would be forced into war eventually. We do so much more good than any other country, it's not even funny. Of course we all want peace, but if someone has the ability to wipe out massive numbers of your citizens, has done it in the past, and is continuing to attempt to do so now, what else can you do?
What is truly noble is the fact that President Bush knows he is fighting an uphill battle and continues to strive for the top. When left to his own devices, man will kill himself with strife. Bush knows this and well, frankly, if we left the Middle East alone, two things would happen:
1) Genocide would wipe out Israel
2) Spain, North Africa, & The Phillipines would be swallowed up by Islamic militants
Do you see America being affected in there? No. We would be fine. We could live our happy lives here, blissfully unaware of what is going on. In the meantime, many innocents would die because they are living on "holy" land. We know that we can stay above the fray, withdraw completely from the Middle East and probably be OK for quite some time. Despite this knowledge, we as a nation care enough about those other people to take casualties for them. We are trying to make peace. Simply put, some people do not want peace and we have to remove them from the equation.
By our actions, are we "trying" to piss off the world? It's a lot easier to do what Germany and France are doing than what we are doing. We will sustain casualties and give up innocent American blood to save their countries! If we took a strict isolationist policy, we would be forced into war eventually. We do so much more good than any other country, it's not even funny. Of course we all want peace, but if someone has the ability to wipe out massive numbers of your citizens, has done it in the past, and is continuing to attempt to do so now, what else can you do?
What is truly noble is the fact that President Bush knows he is fighting an uphill battle and continues to strive for the top. When left to his own devices, man will kill himself with strife. Bush knows this and well, frankly, if we left the Middle East alone, two things would happen:
1) Genocide would wipe out Israel
2) Spain, North Africa, & The Phillipines would be swallowed up by Islamic militants
Do you see America being affected in there? No. We would be fine. We could live our happy lives here, blissfully unaware of what is going on. In the meantime, many innocents would die because they are living on "holy" land. We know that we can stay above the fray, withdraw completely from the Middle East and probably be OK for quite some time. Despite this knowledge, we as a nation care enough about those other people to take casualties for them. We are trying to make peace. Simply put, some people do not want peace and we have to remove them from the equation.
McPatrickClan
McPatrickClan
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 562
Guys, I thought this was a incredibly well-written article about the state of our nation right now in relation to Iraq and the threat of war. It prompts us all to harken back to days when patriotism was not a dirty word and asking "Why?" had its' limits.
START OF TEXT
How not to prepare for war: Views of an active duty Marine
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Sunday, October 6, 2002
I am an enlisted United States Marine, a Gunnery Sergeant. The views in this article are my own and not representative of any other person or organization.
Classified leaks; senators visiting Iraq and criticizing the president in public; retired flag grade officers providing insight on how they might see forces employed for combat; what is our country doing?
I'm all for freedom of expression, but for members of the government to do any of the above should be considered criminal. It is criminal down at the military service level. Members cannot leak info without going to prison. Members cannot bad mouth the president without repercussions as well. The fight at the highest levels of the government needs to be more discreet and behind closed doors. Let the citizens demonstrate and let the media guess, but don't give away our country's actions or intentions. Don't bad mouth the government service members who are going to have to fight in some capacity or another.
For the general public, it's called freedom of speech; for members fighting the enemy in uniform or under some kind of cover, this kind of confusing behavior is a recipe for disaster. Balkan and Mid-East Cultures have no respect for vacillation.
There are three levels to employing forces; the strategic, the operational and the tactical. In layman's terms this means the political level, theater commanders (3 & 4 star officers) to roughly regiment level and grunt level — the people carrying the guns.
Waging war from my way of understanding requires a focused effort at all levels: a solid round versus a shotgun blast. The solid round can kill an elephant, the latter a duck — if you are lucky. Without going into detail here, let me just suggest that reading General Vo Nguyen Giap's book "How We Won The War" illustrates this principle.
My point is simply this. Conflict occurs at three levels: The spiritual/moral, mental and the physical levels. Fog and friction, AKA confusion & uncertainty, is what we try to levy upon the enemy to break his will to fight. That is the bottom line.
Conflict is not about destroying the enemy's weapons, cities, people or soldiers. It's about making an enemy realize that fighting will do him no good, so he should give up. The fact that material damage and loss of life occurs is simply a by-product of attaining the objective of bending him to see our will through. This is an example of how fog and friction can work for us.
On the other hand, if the enemy's Fog (the unknown) is reduced via the leaking of classified information and the blabbing by former senior military experts, or a schizophrenic political leadership, we give him a reason to believe that he can win the fight. WE GIVE HIM THE WILL TO FIGHT. This is especially true if the enemy is backed into a corner. Why tell him our probable courses of action and give him the opportunity to put up the best and hardest defense for the sake of martyrdom and enlarging the conflict? Why break Sun Tzu's dictum on maintaining the State of Formlessness by telling the enemy what we are going to do and how?
Certain citizens of this country have convinced me that members of the armed services need to buy their spouses a hell of a lot of life insurance to carry them over if they, or their friends, die because of someone running their soup-cooler.
Where was Sun Tzu's press corps? My best guest was in the grave. I'm sure he considered them to be enemy spies.
Whether or not anyone realizes this, war has already started. War begins in the mind and heart. How U.S. citizens agree with the president, or not, needs to be handled in a more respectful manner. A service member goes with the decision made by this government regardless of feeling. He just wants to come to home at the end of the day too.
Service members do not want to freeload or get special benefits. They will die for something to believe in, that is the Constitution and to "Defend this Country From All Enemies Foreign and Domestic."
Semper Fidelis, A Marine who plans to retire in 3 years.
Bob Howard
GySgt USMC
END OF TEXT
START OF TEXT
How not to prepare for war: Views of an active duty Marine
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Sunday, October 6, 2002
I am an enlisted United States Marine, a Gunnery Sergeant. The views in this article are my own and not representative of any other person or organization.
Classified leaks; senators visiting Iraq and criticizing the president in public; retired flag grade officers providing insight on how they might see forces employed for combat; what is our country doing?
I'm all for freedom of expression, but for members of the government to do any of the above should be considered criminal. It is criminal down at the military service level. Members cannot leak info without going to prison. Members cannot bad mouth the president without repercussions as well. The fight at the highest levels of the government needs to be more discreet and behind closed doors. Let the citizens demonstrate and let the media guess, but don't give away our country's actions or intentions. Don't bad mouth the government service members who are going to have to fight in some capacity or another.
For the general public, it's called freedom of speech; for members fighting the enemy in uniform or under some kind of cover, this kind of confusing behavior is a recipe for disaster. Balkan and Mid-East Cultures have no respect for vacillation.
There are three levels to employing forces; the strategic, the operational and the tactical. In layman's terms this means the political level, theater commanders (3 & 4 star officers) to roughly regiment level and grunt level — the people carrying the guns.
Waging war from my way of understanding requires a focused effort at all levels: a solid round versus a shotgun blast. The solid round can kill an elephant, the latter a duck — if you are lucky. Without going into detail here, let me just suggest that reading General Vo Nguyen Giap's book "How We Won The War" illustrates this principle.
My point is simply this. Conflict occurs at three levels: The spiritual/moral, mental and the physical levels. Fog and friction, AKA confusion & uncertainty, is what we try to levy upon the enemy to break his will to fight. That is the bottom line.
Conflict is not about destroying the enemy's weapons, cities, people or soldiers. It's about making an enemy realize that fighting will do him no good, so he should give up. The fact that material damage and loss of life occurs is simply a by-product of attaining the objective of bending him to see our will through. This is an example of how fog and friction can work for us.
On the other hand, if the enemy's Fog (the unknown) is reduced via the leaking of classified information and the blabbing by former senior military experts, or a schizophrenic political leadership, we give him a reason to believe that he can win the fight. WE GIVE HIM THE WILL TO FIGHT. This is especially true if the enemy is backed into a corner. Why tell him our probable courses of action and give him the opportunity to put up the best and hardest defense for the sake of martyrdom and enlarging the conflict? Why break Sun Tzu's dictum on maintaining the State of Formlessness by telling the enemy what we are going to do and how?
Certain citizens of this country have convinced me that members of the armed services need to buy their spouses a hell of a lot of life insurance to carry them over if they, or their friends, die because of someone running their soup-cooler.
Where was Sun Tzu's press corps? My best guest was in the grave. I'm sure he considered them to be enemy spies.
Whether or not anyone realizes this, war has already started. War begins in the mind and heart. How U.S. citizens agree with the president, or not, needs to be handled in a more respectful manner. A service member goes with the decision made by this government regardless of feeling. He just wants to come to home at the end of the day too.
Service members do not want to freeload or get special benefits. They will die for something to believe in, that is the Constitution and to "Defend this Country From All Enemies Foreign and Domestic."
Semper Fidelis, A Marine who plans to retire in 3 years.
Bob Howard
GySgt USMC
END OF TEXT
Smokin'Tone
I just might be your huckleberry
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 1,193
Who said anything about becoming an isolationist country? You think sending our boys out to some land that doesn't want us there, will do nothing more than piss the extremists off even more is a good thing? And calling Bush noble? Holy crap. There are many things Bush is, but noble is not one of them.
If by taking out Saddam, and pushing Jordan into taking over what's left, that leaves the good 'ol US as one of the biggest, yes, biggest oil holders in the world. You have BP, Amoco and one of the other big dogs already out there, and by making it an American fortified territory, which it no doubt will become, will be doing a lot of harm. Risking troops lives over this is rediculous. Sending the troops to come back dead, diseased or otherwise is no 'noble man', more like a tyrant along the lines of the Christians when they tried to wipe out the Muslims during the crusades. Al Queda and the other terrorists's head may be severed for the time being, but doen the road I think this whole thing will bring very grave circumstances to the US. Our actions are daring other countries to do the same. Don't like Arafat? Declare war and get rid of him. Don't like the way Canada is minding the border? Wipe them out. That's the message the noble Bush is sending. Hey, let's call N. Korea part of an axis of evil, yet 2 months beforehand sing their praises on how well they're getting along with S. Korea. Yeah. Real noble.
The absolute saddest thing about all this is that Bush really believes he was put on this earth to destroy Saddam, Osama, and to bring a forced peace to the middle east (Newsweek July 2002). It almost sounds extremist to me, not to mention that the same EXACT group of handlers forced Bush the Senior's hand back during GW1. You've got Dick "Hell and Brimstone' Cheney practically going over there himself to have at Saddam himself.
Hey, it's an open forum right? That's my feelings. If ya don't like 'em, don't read me, you don't have to agree with me, that's one of the best things about US. We don't get shot for thinking. Yet.
If by taking out Saddam, and pushing Jordan into taking over what's left, that leaves the good 'ol US as one of the biggest, yes, biggest oil holders in the world. You have BP, Amoco and one of the other big dogs already out there, and by making it an American fortified territory, which it no doubt will become, will be doing a lot of harm. Risking troops lives over this is rediculous. Sending the troops to come back dead, diseased or otherwise is no 'noble man', more like a tyrant along the lines of the Christians when they tried to wipe out the Muslims during the crusades. Al Queda and the other terrorists's head may be severed for the time being, but doen the road I think this whole thing will bring very grave circumstances to the US. Our actions are daring other countries to do the same. Don't like Arafat? Declare war and get rid of him. Don't like the way Canada is minding the border? Wipe them out. That's the message the noble Bush is sending. Hey, let's call N. Korea part of an axis of evil, yet 2 months beforehand sing their praises on how well they're getting along with S. Korea. Yeah. Real noble.
The absolute saddest thing about all this is that Bush really believes he was put on this earth to destroy Saddam, Osama, and to bring a forced peace to the middle east (Newsweek July 2002). It almost sounds extremist to me, not to mention that the same EXACT group of handlers forced Bush the Senior's hand back during GW1. You've got Dick "Hell and Brimstone' Cheney practically going over there himself to have at Saddam himself.
Hey, it's an open forum right? That's my feelings. If ya don't like 'em, don't read me, you don't have to agree with me, that's one of the best things about US. We don't get shot for thinking. Yet.
McPatrickClan
McPatrickClan
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 562
Smokin said:I assumed from the way you stated your debate that you didn't believe the war in Iraq is a war worth diving into. My conclusion is that the situation in Iraq is more dire than we want to know. If this scenario does not demand that we take forceful action, I do not know what would. Thus, I concluded that the likely philosophy that you subscribe to would be isolationism.
Certainly I agree with your point that Iraq and the rest of the Middle East (save Israel) does not want us in their region as agents of change. I would contend that we have little choice given that the next biggest superpower country would be, well, there isn't one. If anyone is going to rescue anyone from anything these days, it's going to be good ole' U.S. of A.
Allofus123
Here ducky, ducky, ducky!
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2001
- Messages
- 3,867
[quote name='Smokin'Tone' date='Oct 8 2002, 12:55 AM']Hey, it's an open forum right? That's my feelings. If ya don't like 'em, don't read me, you don't have to agree with me, that's one of the best things about US. We don't get shot for thinking. Yet.[/quote]
You are exactly right......wonder why?
You are exactly right......wonder why?
Smokin'Tone
I just might be your huckleberry
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 1,193
McPatrickClan said:No way McP, the US should never be isolated from the rest of the world, but I don't think we need to go to war over the guy. I think a few SAS, some GB's and NS's with scopes would do the trick. It'd save a lot of cash, and we'd take him out. I agree also with Lee, if we're going to go in there full bore again, we gotta do it right.Smokin said:I assumed from the way you stated your debate that you didn't believe the war in Iraq is a war worth diving into. My conclusion is that the situation in Iraq is more dire than we want to know. If this scenario does not demand that we take forceful action, I do not know what would. Thus, I concluded that the likely philosophy that you subscribe to would be isolationism.
Certainly I agree with your point that Iraq and the rest of the Middle East (save Israel) does not want us in their region as agents of change. I would contend that we have little choice given that the next biggest superpower country would be, well, there isn't one. If anyone is going to rescue anyone from anything these days, it's going to be good ole' U.S. of A.
It's a scary thing this Middle East mess. How do you deal with countries that at face value like the US, yet behind out backs spend billions on trying to topple us?
And I'm not so sure with Isreal either, the news about their special intel units getting specific chatter and not telling us really bothers me if it's true
McPatrickClan
McPatrickClan
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 562
[quote name='Smokin'Tone' date='Oct 8 2002, 07:14 PM']I think a few SAS, some GB's and NS's with scopes would do the trick. It'd save a lot of cash, and we'd take him out.[/quote]
I am with you 110% on this. It's ironic that many of the same people who oppose a war with Iraq also are against Congressman Barr of Georgia's proposal to re-instate the President's authority to whack world leaders whom he deems fit to be whacked.
Even the most irresponsible President would not just knock off German leaders for fun. This power would be used on those who really do need it, like Sadaam. I used to be against the death penalty and I would love it if we didn't need it, but simply put, some people cause more deaths each day they are alive (i.e. Nidal, Bin Laden, etc.). :angry:
I am with you 110% on this. It's ironic that many of the same people who oppose a war with Iraq also are against Congressman Barr of Georgia's proposal to re-instate the President's authority to whack world leaders whom he deems fit to be whacked.
Even the most irresponsible President would not just knock off German leaders for fun. This power would be used on those who really do need it, like Sadaam. I used to be against the death penalty and I would love it if we didn't need it, but simply put, some people cause more deaths each day they are alive (i.e. Nidal, Bin Laden, etc.). :angry: