RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:10:28 PM

LaTigresse

Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

Wheeeeeee!!!!!!!
I have front row seats at the Psych Ward!

Indeed....... gotta love when you can wind these guys up and watch em dance. In blue and red even!!

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to Aileen1968)

Post #: 641

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:12:12 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

So NO, Iraq was NOT a huge diversion. Under asymmetrical warfare, you do not need to use your own military to attack another nation. You do not even need to send a military over to be an imminent threat. Iraq under Saddam was an asymmetrical threat to the United States. Al-Qaeda had the manpower. They had the martyrdom brigades willing to send suicide bombers to the United States. What is missing is WMD.
I take it back. You aint even a fuckin private.

reread the white paper presented by the chinese colonels. hey, you brought the fucker up.

we are fighting a war on terrorism where the terrorists aint in Iraq, bankrupting our country by sending our goods and services out of country for what? while the people who fund terrorism are making oil money off us as well....we kill and maim more Iraqis than Saddam ever could, thus insuring our enmity with them for several more generations, all the while the terrorist are not being dealt with. In addition, we have seriously destabilized that part of the middle east, will be bogged down there for eons to come, and blah blah blah blah blah. We are not fighting an asynchronous war, they are.

Again 'threat' is ideology, not a concrete action. You need to understand what you research and glean the real from the asswipe, something you are not at all apt at.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/13/2010 2:14:05 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 642

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:14:57 PM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

WRONG....

What do you mean I'm wrong? The OP is a huge cunt!

_____________________________

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 643

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:17:01 PM

subtee

Posts: 5133
Joined: 7/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

The whole thing reminds me of how security guards wish they were "real cops," or how university lecturers enjoy being called "Professor" even though they're not. He's facile with words, but not a skilled propagandist, so he's not on a media team. If he wrote press releases sent to CNN, or helped to monitor and influence Wikipedia and political blogs, he wouldn't be allowed to run this thread at all. The "others" already know he isn't good enough to cut it at a job like that, precisely because he is an ass, unable to incorporate the concerns of others and still make his point. He's acting out a fantasy here. It's a humiliation fantasy, but hey, he consented to it, so he started his thread on the right site.

I like those analogies. None of us can hide who we really are for long, so I'm guessing "the others" already have an opinion not much divergent from what he has cultivated here.

_____________________________

Don't believe everything you think...

(in reply to RedMagic1)

Post #: 644

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:18:22 PM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

Isn't there anyone, one single person where you live that you would like to spend time with before you get blowed up?

_____________________________

(in reply to mnottertail)

Post #: 645

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:21:31 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

form his computer overheating in mommas basement?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to domiguy)

Post #: 646

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:30:19 PM

LaTigresse

Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Isn't there anyone, one single person where you live that you would like to spend time with before you get blowed up?

We, here at Mattel for Adults, have no emotional attachment to our inflatables. There are always hundreds, nay thousands, more to replace those that leave us.

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to domiguy)

Post #: 647

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:31:45 PM

vincentML

Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

My question is twofold (perhaps it has already been asked and I apologize if it has):

1. Assuming for the moment they had stockpiles, exactly how was Iraq's possession of WMD an imminent threat to the United States to justify a preemptive strike?

2. Why was the removal of Saddam worth 4500 lives of young Americans, countless serious military wounded, and untold numbers of civilian deaths? (I won't even begin to consider the drain on our national treasury)

Would appreciate your answers. Thanks.

I've lost count of how many times the people I've debated with, over the past few years, have asked this question. The wording is different, but the questions are the same.

So I'm going to post a copy and paste of one of my responses. This one was targeted to one person, not you, but the concepts are sill applicable.

1. The War on Terrorism is not confined to Afghanistan or Al-Qaeda.

2. If Osama Bin Laden leaves Afghanistan, there is nothing any amount of troops INSIDE of Afghanistan can do to

Let me run this to you again.

Our troops in Afghanistan are limited to that country's boundaries. So, it does not matter if we have 1 million boots on the ground in Afghanistan, or just 10. If Bin Laden is OUTSIDE of Afghanistan, there is nothing any amount of boots on the ground INSIDE Afghanistan would be able to do to secure his capture.

3. Iraq was not a huge division on the war on terrorism. Anybody that claims such fails to understand the true nature of the war we are involved with. <SNIP> <SNIP>

Excuse me. I have read your rant and I do not see where you answered my questions. I would like to have direct answers to my questions as you have demanded of other posters. They are really quite explicit questions, simply asked. I would appreciate answers on point without so much obfuscation. I will ask them again. More directly if I can.

1. What was the imminent threat posed by Iraq that justified our preemptive assault?

2. In what way did the removal of Saddam justify the lives lost by 4500 + young American/UK men and women?

Please try to answer without bullshitting me. Thank you.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 648

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:31:53 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Corey Feldman, Tom Hanks, Bruce Dern? nobody at all?

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/13/2010 2:33:28 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to LaTigresse)

Post #: 649

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:46:39 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

My posts here indicate that I'm in the Army. Doesn't matter which branch you were in. With your back ground, you should've had the common sense to use the Army names for the ranks I have to work for. This is basic knowledge to most people that have been in the military.

I think I may have mentioned that I was never in the army and had no desire to ever be a soldier.
I have been out of the military for more than 40 years.
When I was in the military "my kind" thought that "your kind" were amatures and consequently we did not associate.
What the rank structure is in your amature organization makes less than no difference to me.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 650

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:47:07 PM

SohCahToa

Posts: 563
Joined: 3/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
1. What was the imminent threat posed by Iraq that justified our preemptive assault?

2. In what way did the removal of Saddam justify the lives lost by 4500 + young American/UK men and women?

1) When there is a single country containing a hung number of people with moustaches then there is always the risk of this fashion choice spreading to the rest of the world.

2) Nothing is worth such a loss of human life, why do we even categorise the lives lost into nationalities?

Have not these questions been asked and answered a thousand times, we won't be happy with the answers because they are always inadequate (which should tell us something). You are talking to someone that sees the Iraq war as a victory. That was the funniest thing I'd read in a long time and left me wondering what losing would have felt like. There'll be another war somewhere in five years, our defence budget demands it (use it or lose it).

Edited: 3rd time lucky and using the right button this time; this was a real fight against bad English but I finally won yeahaaa.

< Message edited by SohCahToa -- 5/13/2010 2:54:29 PM >

_____________________________

ڪ০મ໒คमՇՕΔ
- Pax vobiscum -

"Come ride with me through the veins of history. I'll show you a God who falls asleep on the job." - Muse

(in reply to vincentML)

Post #: 651

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 2:48:49 PM

SohCahToa

Posts: 563
Joined: 3/17/2006
Status: offline

.

< Message edited by SohCahToa -- 5/13/2010 2:49:14 PM >

_____________________________

ڪ০મ໒คमՇՕΔ
- Pax vobiscum -

"Come ride with me through the veins of history. I'll show you a God who falls asleep on the job." - Muse

(in reply to SohCahToa)

Post #: 652

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:45:04 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

When Saddam complained about US and UK spies in the inspection team, he was being one sided. He said nothing about the Russian spies that were in the inspection team, helping him deceive the United Nations.

Thats some really thin gruel. So, effectively, a pissant third world country already under restrictions fooled the UN, as two security council founding members sat by silently and amazed...fuckin shocked and awed....silent betties they were. In the mid to late 60s in Viet Nam (huntie, you know that time better than me) there were spy planes that from 26,000 feet could take photos of a fuckin cigarette butt on the ground, and tell you the brand. Further, bricks in the background------you laughable imbicile.....ever saw the pictures taken in the Cuban Missle crisis (1962)? How many millions do you think we spent in hi-tech flyovers looking for WMD? hid in a pile of bricks, goddamn, thats slick.

Even beyond that, seems to me that when the SECRETARY OF STATE OF the UNITED STATES espoused the case for going to war with Iraq in general assembly to the UN and broadcast all over the world, he coulda come up with more than one picture of a tiny cropduster shown over and over and over and over again, as proof of WMD.

The fact that you've never been to Iraq painfully shows when you attempt to describe my explanation as "thin gruel."

If you've ever been to Iraq, you'd be able to see how easy it'd be to hide something from view... to include hiding something from aerial and space view. Satellites can hover over a country, but you'd have to zero in on a specific area in that country to get a bird's eye view of what's in that country. The moment you zoom that satellite in, you're exposed to a smaller area.

Spy planes can't capture a whole country either. Those spy planes fly a specific track. When they zoom their cameras to the ground, they're observing a limited area of that country.

In both instances, there are periods when the operators (satellite or airplane) won't be able to observe what's taking place on the ground. The Russians and Chinese are aware of this when we're operating these equipment, and we're aware of it when they're operating theirs. So we take advantage of those periods when the area won't, or can't be under surveillance to do what we have to do.

So that's where the Russians came in. They knew our satellite and spy plane vulnerabilities. They waited for those vulnerabilities, then they assisted the Iraqis. It's that simple.

As far as being able to find everything in the desert. We've found things (conventional weapon related) in the desert that neither satellite nor spy plane could find. It took an Iraqi to bring that attention to us before we realized that it was there.

So my argument stands. We have a brick, or some other common item, laying around. If you're sifting through spy plane or Satelite commera photo, you're going to easily overlook it for something conventional.

So your argument still doesn't stand.

(in reply to SohCahToa)

Post #: 653

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:46:05 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

no, PSG is unique to the ARMY. most other branches wouldnt know it.

in the suck, there is SGT, SSG and Gunny or Gunnie (gunnery sergeant) so he said PSG in effect. What the fuck he said is E7 one way or another, they never call them pricks SFC or sergeant. No more than you would dare call a warrant officer or Drill Sergeant or Sergeant Major sir, it is just so not worth it.

I have done my research. I am satisfied you are as full of shit as a christmas goose.

WRONG.

Both Marines and Army have a platoon sergeant. They also have squad leaders and team leaders. If you were in the Navy, and you worked with the Army or Marines, you'd also be aware of the Marines and Army using the term "platoon sergeant." His intention was to have a situation where the senior NCO was telling me to do something. What you describe is beside the point. As I indicated, those are hard, text use of their ranks. Both of you used the textbook version, and not the actual version, of what we use.

Now, had he been in the Marines, he wouldn't have mistaken my boss to be a gunnery sergeant, knowing that I was in the Army. The gunnery sergeant name isn't transferable... even you pointed out that he's equivalent to the SFC. However, platoon sergeant can be used in both Army and Marines.

Had he served, he would've used "platoon sergeant" in the discussion we were having.

Also, in the Army, warrants are either called "sir" or "chief." I've done both, and haven't gotten into trouble for it. Your research needs more working.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 654

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:47:57 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

You do realize that you have to present a reasoned, fact based argument against me before you could spew drivel about "long winded" or "stupid" posts, do you?

No she doesn't. She can post what she wants to post within the guidelines of TOS.

So what you're saying is that she can come on here and act like an ass. I never denied her right to do that. But I have every right to fire back at her for making a comment like that. She spews drivel about my posts being "stupid" and "long winded," yet does nothing to try to present a reasoned argument, or even examine what I've said.

I doubt that she'd do that, her comment is ideologically driven..

quote:

Well, guess what? THIS IS FUN dumbass! I take sadistic pleasure in destroying you people in argument.

That's what it really is all about for you. Not to offer a point of view, but to be an ass. What will "the others" think of you as you have represented yourself here when you take this thread back to them?

Only an ass wouldn't see that I've made a point here. I've presented a reasoned argument, and I've also presented a stance on this thread... after it switched from its original intent. As for what others will think? This wouldn't be the first time I've done something like this. And guess what? The people that I've shown these types of comments to have been a lot more brutal in their reaction than I was.

(in reply to subtee)

Post #: 655

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:49:04 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee
That's what it really is all about for you. Not to offer a point of view, but to be an ass. What will "the others" think of you as you have represented yourself here when you take this thread back to them?

The whole thing reminds me of how security guards wish they were "real cops," or how university lecturers enjoy being called "Professor" even though they're not.

You're making a apples to oranges comparison here. I'm in the military, if you insist on insinuating that I'm not, I've issued a challenge that nobody here has accepted. This isn't the case where I "wish" I was the real thing, as I am. Anybody that suggests otherwise, without accepting my challenge, simply lacks integrity.

RedMagic1 He's facile with words, but not a skilled propagandist, so he's not on a media team.

My posts aren't propaganda, but my observations, and assessments based on my observations, experience and research.

RedMagic1 If he wrote press releases sent to CNN, or helped to monitor and influence Wikipedia and political blogs, he wouldn't be allowed to run this thread at all.

One, I don't write for those organizations, as they're outside my specialty. Two, I don't engage in propaganda. Three based on what you've said on this thread, there's no way in hell they'd let you, or anybody that I've argued with, run this thread.

RedMagic1 The "others" already know he isn't good enough to cut it at a job like that,

To cut it at a job that requires spin and propaganda? No. To cut it at a job requiring presenting the facts? YES.

RedMagic1 precisely because he is an ass,

So says the dumbass that comes on this thread making an unqualified statement, then runs off when called out in the reply.

RedMagic1 unable to incorporate the concerns of others and still make his point.

So let me get this straight. Your side of the argument can come here and spit your vitriol at me, attempt to cast my background, and my statements of being in the service to doubt, and attack me in general, and I'm supposed to sit still and treat them with respect? Hate to break this out to you moron, but that's not how I do business.

Don't confuse my refusing to accept someone's BS as my refusing to incorporate the concerns of others.

RedMagic1 He's acting out a fantasy here. It's a humiliation fantasy, but hey, he consented to it, so he started his thread on the right site.

In order to insinuate that you guys are "humiliating" me in this debate, you guys have to actually do something to "humiliate" me. Like, say, return fire with a reasoned argument. Not only that, but you guys are giving me the same pointers others before you have. Your side of the argument is pulling a Baghdad Bob.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 656

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:49:26 PM

LaTigresse

Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline

And guess what? The people that I've shown these types of comments to have been a lot more brutal in their reaction than I was.

Are we supposed to be scared or something??

< Message edited by LaTigresse -- 5/13/2010 4:50:39 PM >

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 657

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:50:03 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

mnottertail: now, didnt you think you made some real points by giving me hell for my quoting part of what you said (although I did quote it all in the post) but you do in indiscriminately, and constantly and with abusion

If you bothered to look at my post, you'd notice that I quoted a post that someone else made. That past chopped your comments out, not me. When I address your points the first time, I include everything that you say. Don't get on my case for something that the people I quote do. Go talk to them.

mnottertail: and no, you aint said not one fucking actual concrete thing here, in all these posts its all bullshit.

UMM, I DID! For this statement to be true, you would've answered my yes/no questions. So far, I'm still waiting. Go ahead, if it isn't "concrete," you'd be able to answer it easily.

mnottertail: And I am happy that you have a high opinion of the asswipe you spew,

What you mistake as "opinion" and "asswipe" is an assessment of a reasoned argument. I've presented the facts, and a logical argument, which still stand on this board. Your disagreement with the facts, your opinion of them, doesn't change that fact.

mnottertail: but you might look here private, and see you are losing big fuckin ground, anyone who was a vet that supported you in any small thing, no longer seems to.

If you're talking about this thread, nope, not losing ground. Notice, for instance, that this thread has gone from the original intent, to what we're talking about. That represents me destroying you in your original argument, then you retreating to another argument. I destroy you in that one, so you shift to another one. If anybody is losing ground, it's you.

If you're talking about support here, well, I direct your attention to my profile. As of 13 May 13, 2010, it states that I'm here for the forums. It doesn't state that I'm here looking to make and keep friends. The real world covers that need for me.

And no, not everybody that supported me earlier has outed themselves as not really supporting me.

mnottertail: Boy like you shits in his pants, welll goddammit, hes just gonna have to sit in it awhile.

The only thing that I've seen here is that I've pissed the opposition, and their supporters, off with my persistence with this fight. You guys expected me to disappear for good, but that didn't happen.

Well, here's something you should know.

I intend to stay in this fight. If I disappear from here for any length of time, it's not because I've "left" this fight. It only means that my return here has been delayed. But, my coming back to this thread to reply to you guys is as almost as guaranteed as death and taxes.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 658

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:51:41 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

From the Iraq Survey Group Final Report:

an organ for W to masturbate to REPEAT POINT REPEAT POIT REPEAT POINT.

Shit is shit, don't matter how much you shovel it, it is gonna be shit.

If that's the case:

From MSNBC: "Bomb Said to hold deadly sarin gas explodes in Iraq"

"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," said Kimmitt, the chief military spokesman in Iraq. "The round had been rigged as an IED [improvised explosive device] which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy.

Were the Iraqi Survey Group, and Kimmitt, lying and telling half truths in that MSNBC article? YES [ ] NO [ ]

I don't want your SPIN... simply copy and paste everything from "From MSNBC" all the way to "YES [ ] NO [ ]." Place an "X" in the appropriate box.

I don't want your bullshit, just make your selection. If you chose "NO," then you prove your argument, that "shit is shit" with regards to what I said, FALSE.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 659

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:52:58 PM

herfacechair

Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

Wheeeeeee!!!!!!!
I have front row seats at the Psych Ward!

Indeed....... gotta love when you can wind these guys up and watch em dance. In blue and red even!!

It's already given that I'm going to come on here and reply to people's posts. A post bot could've made a post for you, and I would've responded in kind if a response was required.

(in reply to herfacechair)

Post #: 660

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.141