RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer

RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:21:59 AM)
quote: your military...isn't very effective at dealing with insurgency. No military is. That's why it works so well. I'd argue the U.S. is doing better than average, though. Compare this to the French in Algeria. We've learned a few things. Granted, we still face a step learning curve--but we're climbing it.

rulemylife -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:22:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCord Those who do not understand/believe that Obama wishes to destroy and weaken this nation are either naive or blind. I predicted he'd go after the military....and he has. quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer How has he "gone after the military" by trying to reduce the nuclear threat in the world?

pahunkboy -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:23:08 AM)
We spread nothing but love and peace in this country and around the world. hiCUP

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:24:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail and by the way, once again this 'supposed' original words from the op is a plagarism (as nearly 99% of his crap is, notwithstanding his further prevarication regarding same...) from a chris w of abbington mass, a 24 year old with about a 7 year old political intelligence. Ron The OP gave a link to the original article. OH THE FUCK HE DID. I don't see where he claimed the words were originally his. I DONT SEE WHERE HE ATTRIBUTED THEM TO THE AUTHOR If you want to attack his logic and reasoning, go ahead. I DID Attacking him for specious reasons doesn't make a lot of sense. SO, TO INDICATE THAT SPECIOUS REASONING DESERVES NO HONEST CONTEMPLATION IS....WTF? CAN YOU TRY THAT AGAIN WITH SOME FORM OF LOGIC It reflects on you, not him. BE A LITTLE LESS QUICK TO ATTACK, AND ACTUALLY HAVE SOME VALID POINTS (which maybe you wouldnt have shot off about if you would have actually looked at his link) Firm I'm ok with my reflection, I find it rather beatific, truth be told, Firm. LOL, Ron

Musicmystery -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:27:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCord Those who do not understand/believe that Obama wishes to destroy and weaken this nation are either naive or blind. I predicted he'd go after the military....and he has. AND with that, the next excuse for the next round in runaway neo-con spending is set in place. Literally, we could cut defense by half and STILL spend more and have more by FAR than any other nation. You're supporting the production of unneeded goods, not defense.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:30:17 AM)
Yeah, more government handouts, programs, subsidies, bigger government employment. When are the neo-cons, conservatives, teabaggers, republicans, libertarians, independents, whatever the fuck they want to call themselves today going to learn that we need some fiscal responsibility and need to crack down on wasteful spending?

FirmhandKY -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:30:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: countrychick So you mean to say that the terrorists who did the whole 9-11 thing were acting under the direct orders of the Afghan government? Not in their own self interests and hey lets poke the sleeping giant? The government of Afghanistan allowed the training and gave material support to an organization which had declared war on the US, and then proceeded to attack and murder American citizens in our homeland. We asked that the Afghan government turn over the people responsible and stop providing support. They refused. Morally, and legally, this made the government of Afghanistan complicit in the attacks, and guilty of waging war on the US. Firm

countrychick -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:33:17 AM)
Okay fine, so why hasn't the US found those people responsible on their own then? Perhaps thats the reason the Afghans didn't turn them over they're super super sneaky and good at hiding, so good that American Marines can't even find them [:D] Maybe they should be hired by the American government to train the military in sneaky tactics ;)

RacerJim -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:33:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead No argument with that, Mike, but (as you say) your military is pretty useless for what you want it doing at the moment, unfortunately. Would you mind expanding on this thought? How is our military "pretty useless" for "what [we] want it doing at the moment"? Firm It's a pretty simple point that doesn't really need explaining further: your military, based on its performance in Iraq since Hussein was deposed and Afghanistan more or less since it arrived there, isn't very effective at dealing with insurgency. I'm told it had much the same problem in Vietnam, Bosnia and Korea, so this is hardly a new development. The reason our military sometimes isn't as effective as it could be at dealing with insurgency is because our military is subordinate to our politicians, most of whom have never served in our military and have no idea as to an effective method for our military to deal with an insurgency. You've been told wrong about Vietnam and Korea. Our military had the Vietnam War won shortly after North Vietnam's Spring '68 TeT Offensive but our politicians grasped defeat from the jaws of victory when our Democratic majority Congress revoked the "Gulf of Tonkin" resolution in 1973 thereby revoking Republican President Nixon's authority to continue prosecuting the Vietnam War. Since North Korea hasn't invaded South Korea ever since our military kicked the former and their Chinese comrades back to whence they came 50+ years ago I'd say our military has been quite effective there.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:33:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail and by the way, once again this 'supposed' original words from the op is a plagarism (as nearly 99% of his crap is, notwithstanding his further prevarication regarding same...) from a chris w of abbington mass, a 24 year old with about a 7 year old political intelligence. Ron The OP gave a link to the original article. OH THE FUCK HE DID. I don't see where he claimed the words were originally his. I DONT SEE WHERE HE ATTRIBUTED THEM TO THE AUTHOR If you want to attack his logic and reasoning, go ahead. I DID Attacking him for specious reasons doesn't make a lot of sense. SO, TO INDICATE THAT SPECIOUS REASONING DESERVES NO HONEST CONTEMPLATION IS....WTF? CAN YOU TRY THAT AGAIN WITH SOME FORM OF LOGIC It reflects on you, not him. BE A LITTLE LESS QUICK TO ATTACK, AND ACTUALLY HAVE SOME VALID POINTS (which maybe you wouldnt have shot off about if you would have actually looked at his link) Firm I'm ok with my reflection, I find it rather beatific, truth be told, Firm. LOL, Ron Ah, apologies, Ron. I hadn't actually followed his link. Perhaps the article is on that website: I don't know. I looked a bit and couldn't find it. Firm

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:34:16 AM)
got a chicken and egg issue there Firm. Is it a matter of timing or of whos in the drivers seat, I was under the impression that we trained, financed, and harboured these Afhganis in the first place in insurgency, against the Russkies. Damn we must be good, they are still doing it, even against their former masters.

Musicmystery -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:34:39 AM)
Firm, That's fine on the face of it, but the "government" of Afghanistan is at best a euphemism, and closer to a fantasy. This is a nation still largely in the 4th century, ruled by tribal warlords. Many saw the Taliban as a step up--if that helps paint the picture.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:35:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: countrychick Okay fine, so why hasn't the US found those people responsible on their own then? Perhaps thats the reason the Afghans didn't turn them over they're super super sneaky and good at hiding, so good that American Marines can't even find them [:D] Maybe they should be hired by the American government to train the military in sneaky tactics ;) We've killed and captured a good number of them. Some escaped to Pakistan, which we are loath to directly invade for several reasons, not the least is that we do get some support from that nation. Firm

countrychick -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:36:01 AM)
if I'm not mistaken the attack on the Afghan people was timed quite well to be just past the lifespan of the (I believe) anti-aircraft or some sort of missile that basically turned the tide for the Afghan's to push the Russians out :) Thanks for the reminder mnottertail :D

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:37:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Guns,sophisticated and intense training regimens and the ability to operate autonomously...nope Moon,we are the world pre-eminent conventional force. Of course the value of that has been somewhat degraded by the evolution of warfare inot these littel insurgent affairs....but against any traditional nation-state and their armed forces....our tecnological advantage combined with those other factors leave us standing on the top of the hill alone. After coming back here and reading Firm and Moon's little debate...I thought I might clarify something....that perhaps I should have reacted to earlier.... Moon as you can clearly see here I never did say,nor did I ever mean to imply..."pretty useless". Clearly I chose the the words "somewhat degraded" now in case my original intent was not clear enough...what I meant by that was that we happen to lose some of the value that we acrue thru our tecnological and advanced training programs when we become involve d in these urban insurgancies. Losing some advantages is not equal to being "pretty useless" sorry Moon. I should have seen this earlier and responded appropriately....America's Armed Forces are indeed the most capable fighting force in the world bar none no matter the enviorment...thats not nationalistic chest thumping...thats fact!

Musicmystery -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:37:52 AM)
quote: The reason our military sometimes isn't as effective as it could be at dealing with insurgency is because our military is subordinate to our politicians, most of whom have never served in our military and have no idea as to an effective method for our military to deal with an insurgency. This is silly. So if suddenly we elect military people, insurgency will disappear? Vietnam involvement started under Eisenhower--a general. Didn't seem to help. Second, if you did any research, I doubt you'd find that MOST of our politicians have never served. I think you'll find more have than not.

countrychick -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:38:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY We've killed and captured a good number of them. So what about the head honcho? Mister Osama bin Laden himself? Isn't it always the goal to get the head of the organization? Just like when police forces are dealing with drug lords and mafia bosses? Who cares about the little guy who smuggles the drugs from Mexico to the US when you could get the guy orchestrating it all?

mnottertail -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:38:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Ah, apologies, Ron. I hadn't actually followed his link. Perhaps the article is on that website: I don't know. I looked a bit and couldn't find it. Firm nope, whole nother tinfoiler rant that, here's the one though: http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978160055 No real long-lasting problem, Firm ... as you know, I am just as passionate about my partisanship as you are about yours. Sometimes we all vituperate first and think later. We are still friendly combatants. Cordially, Ron

FirmhandKY -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:38:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Firm, That's fine on the face of it, but the "government" of Afghanistan is at best a euphemism, and closer to a fantasy. This is a nation still largely in the 4th century, ruled by tribal warlords. Many saw the Taliban as a step up--if that helps paint the picture. No big argument there, MM. However, the ruling group of Afghanistan claimed nation-state status, and was treated as such (although not recognized by many other nation-states). As well, the Taliban had the actual power to do as we asked. They simply refused, and suffered the consequences. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Obama Weakens American National Defense; Liberals Cheer (4/12/2010 10:41:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Guns,sophisticated and intense training regimens and the ability to operate autonomously...nope Moon,we are the world pre-eminent conventional force. Of course the value of that has been somewhat degraded by the evolution of warfare inot these littel insurgent affairs....but against any traditional nation-state and their armed forces....our tecnological advantage combined with those other factors leave us standing on the top of the hill alone. After coming back here and reading Firm and Moon's little debate...I thought I might clarify something....that perhaps I should have reacted to earlier.... Moon as you can clearly see here I never did say,nor did I ever mean to imply..."pretty useless". Clearly I chose the the words "somewhat degraded" now in case my original intent was not clear enough...what I meant by that was that we happen to lose some of the value that we acrue thru our tecnological and advanced training programs when we become involve d in these urban insurgancies. Losing some advantages is not equal to being "pretty useless" sorry Moon. I should have seen this earlier and responded appropriately....America's Armed Forces are indeed the most capable fighting force in the world bar none no matter the enviorment...thats not nationalistic chest thumping...thats fact! Well said, Mike. Firm

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02