Conflict In Iraq

[stephanie]

I'm off to Go Fucking PuKe now.......Thats all...

Marc Sandalow, Washington Bureau Chief

Sunday, January 7, 2007
(01-07) 04:00 PST Washington -- President Bush and the new Congress are on a collision course over Iraq that could overshadow the Democrats' "100-hour agenda'' and end up defining Rep. Nancy Pelosi's tenure as House speaker.

Even as the House takes steps this week to raise the minimum wage, expand stem cell research, strengthen homeland security and lower prescription drug prices -- an ambitious lineup -- much of the nation's focus will be on Bush, who is expected to deliver a major address to outline the future of American involvement in Iraq.

If the president, as expected, announces his intention to deploy as many as 20,000 additional U.S. troops in Iraq, he may encounter widespread political and public defiance.

It will quickly test the new Democratic majority's capacity to stand up to the commander in chief in a time of war, and the ability of the legislative branch to seize control of the White House's controversial foreign policy.

"This war needs to come to an end. It is my highest priority as speaker,'' Pelosi said Friday after less than 24 hours on the job. "The president is going to have to step back. Up until now, his judgment has been severely impaired on this war in Iraq.''

But the issue has been vexing to Congress, which has limited foreign policy options and has traditionally played a secondary role to the president. And Democrats are far more united in opposing Bush's war policy than in coalescing around an alternative.

It is with good reason that Iraq is not on Pelosi's 100-hour agenda -- legislation that she intends to have the House pass before the president delivers his State of the Union address later this month. Democrats are nearly unanimous in their support of the mostly domestic agenda, but they do not share a consensus on what to do next in Iraq, beyond a broad sense that the United States must begin to scale back.

"Democrats as a caucus have much more consensus around these economic issues,'' said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future, a liberal advocacy group, during an interview on the public radio program "Democracy Now.''

Bush has been inviting lawmakers from both parties to the White House to discuss the future in Iraq. None has emerged with the impression that scaling back U.S. involvement is a leading option for the president. As Bush rattled off areas of potential agreement and bipartisan promise during his Saturday radio address, he did not mention Iraq.

Opposition to the war and Bush's approach in Iraq appeared to play a significant role in the Democrats' electoral success in November. Pelosi, as she assumed the speakership Thursday, declared that "nowhere were the American people more clear about the need for a new direction than in Iraq.''

Sitting down with a small group of San Francisco journalists in her new office Friday, Pelosi bristled when a reporter said he wanted to change the subject from war to ethics.

"Wait a minute,'' Pelosi interrupted. "I believe the biggest ethical issue in this country is the war in Iraq. How we went there; how we put our troops out there without the equipment they needed; how, when they have given their all -- and they did their job very well -- they were abandoned in terms of political and diplomatic initiatives that are necessary to accompany a military effort.''


]As Pelosi's No. 1 priority, a change in the course of the war would be trumpeted as a great accomplishment. And while failure in Iraq might be blamed primarily on Bush and impair the GOP's ability to hold onto the White House in the 2008 election, it would also raise questions about whether Democrats were able to keep their pledge to usher in a new direction.

"The people have spoken. They expect change,'' said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, one of the founders of the Out of Iraq caucus in the House.

For now, Democrats are counting on growing public opposition and congressional oversight to force that change.

Pelosi has held open the possibility of attaching conditions to the Pentagon's appropriation bill, which the House expects to receive in the next few weeks. And Democrats have scheduled at least five hearings on Iraq this week, three in the Senate and two in the House.

"Making policy openly, with transparency and accountability, will help,'' said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, whose committee on government reform is expected to scrutinize Iraq contracts received by Halliburton and other private companies.

"They haven't been answering the tough questions,'' Waxman said, noting that Rep. Ike Skelton, the Missouri Democrat and new chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, never received a reply when he sent the White House a letter shortly after the start of the war asking about follow-through plans.

"Now you can be certain he will get an answer,'' Waxman said.

But Pelosi has ruled out using what many believe is the legislative branch's most potent weapon -- its ability to cut off the funds with which the Pentagon wages war. Congress took such an approach at the very end of the Vietnam War, though the United States had already committed to leaving.

A growing number of peace organizations, and a few members of Congress, have been promoting such a direction as the only way to force Bush to change course.
Pelosi said to cut the money supply could be dangerous to American troops in that the Pentagon could continue to wage war without the proper equipment.

"You have to face the ramifications of your decision. You can't just say, 'OK, let's cut if off, but I don't mean to hurt the troops,' '' Pelosi said.

Bush has shown little sign that the November election will change his thinking on the almost 4-year-old war.

"I don't know if (voters) said, 'Come home and leave behind an Iraq that could end up being a safe haven for al Qaeda.' I don't believe they said that,'' the president said in a news conference the day after the vote.

In the buildup to Bush's speech -- which may come Wednesday, although a time and a place have yet to be announced -- White House press secretary Tony Snow has avoided answering questions about how the president could escalate a war after what appeared to be a rejection of his policy. Polls show about 3 of 4 Americans oppose the president's efforts in Iraq and fewer than 1 in 5 support a surge of troops.

"What you're doing is, you're asking me, 'Is the president concerned about the public-opinion ramifications of a policy that he may or may not have chosen?' When the president chooses a policy, we can do the public polling questions. I think at this point it's preliminary,'' Snow said Friday.

But most observers foresee an intensified struggle between Bush and Congress.

"We can see a major clash coming between a Democratic Congress and the administration on this very, very fundamental issue,'' said Bruce Riedel, a former member of Bush's National Security Council and now a fellow at the Brookings Institution. "Not only do most Democrats on the Hill oppose the surge or have serious doubts about it, but more and more Republicans have doubts about the wisdom of the surge.''

Even as the Democrats schedule votes on domestic issues for the rest of the month, Pelosi believes the new congressional scrutiny on Bush's Iraq policy will pressure lawmakers of both parties to join her demand for change.

"The opposition to the war and the call for change is coming from the American people," the speaker said.

"Nothing is more eloquent to a member of Congress than the voice of his or her constituents.''
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/01/07/DEMS.TMP

[Gaffer]

The opposion of the war is coming from the liberal democrats and not from the American people. It's coming from the liberal controled media as well. And I BLAME THE DEMOCRATS AND THE MEDIA FOR EVERY AMERICAN KILLED IN IRAQ!

[dirt mcgirt]

The opposion of the war is coming from the liberal democrats and not from the American people. It's coming from the liberal controled media as well. And I BLAME THE DEMOCRATS AND THE MEDIA FOR EVERY AMERICAN KILLED IN IRAQ!
It's a clear majority of Americans, both Repub, Dem, liberal, and con, who now think the war was a mistake. Blaming the democrats and the media for every American killed in Iraq would be intellectually dishonest. This war was poorly planned and conducted in an ineffective manner. Like it or not, the Repubs had a clear majority during Iraq and the Dumbocrats were nothing more than powerless dweebs. This latest troop surge should have happened two years ago when it mattered. An additional 100,000 troops were needed to seal the borders and provide extra security in the city. We came in there ill-equipped and unprepared. Our Soldiers never should have had to personally buy body armor from US Cavalry or e-bay and have it shipped over from the States. The Iraqi Army never should have been disbanded. And Al Sadr should have been taken out from the get go. The libtards had nothing to do with those blunders.

[darin]

It's a clear majority of Americans, both Repub, Dem, liberal, and con, who now think the war was a mistake.


:bullshit:

It's easy to sit in your safe harbor and sharp-shoot, isn't it?

[Pale Rider]

Nancy *hooker* Pelosi can't do shit when it comes to telling the president what he can and can't do in Iraq. She's about ten sizes too big for her britches already.

[dirt mcgirt]

:bullshit:
Majority of Americans who think the war was a mistake > 50%. They are made up of Repubs, Dems, Cons, and Libs. It's not bullshit, it's reality. Look at the poll numbers.

61 percent oppose Iraq troop surge, poll finds (http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/ss/nationworld/38046.php)


Seven-in-Ten Americans Would Exit Iraq in 2008 (http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=14333)


The CBS poll shows 43-percent of Americans want the nation to keep fighting the war but with a different strategy. 52-percent says it’s time for the US to start ending its involvement. Only three-percent want us to continue on the same course and two out of three now believe that it wasn’t worth it to remove Saddam Hussein from power. (http://www.kyw1060.com/pages/179714.php?contentType=4&contentId=285601)


More troops unhappy with Bush's course in Iraq, poll finds (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-29-poll-iraq_x.htm?csp=34)

[dirt mcgirt]

It's easy to sit in your safe harbor and sharp-shoot, isn't it?
I speak as a former veteran and as the husband of an active duty Soldier. I've lost several friends and neighbors in Iraq and currently have several family members serving in theater. Don't throw your keyboard warrior, college republican bit at me.

[jillian]

The opposion of the war is coming from the liberal democrats and not from the American people. It's coming from the liberal controled media as well. And I BLAME THE DEMOCRATS AND THE MEDIA FOR EVERY AMERICAN KILLED IN IRAQ!

That's pretty sick. Perhaps you should place the blame where it belongs, on the pres and his buddies for their hubris and incompetence.

[IjustTiredofBush]

I think its great that there are more demecratic people in congress...

i think that just might stop bush from sending troops to iraq

iraq is a waste of money

To just ask you this simple question

why are we in war??

Is there a reason...??

NO i dont think so...

i bet the president is profiting off the

oil in iraq

thats the only common sense in this dumb wasteless war

its not even a war we are

just sitting there waiting and having our troops killed

he may not understand cause those

arent his kids fighting

i wonder why he wont send them??

I just think it a bunch of **** that our president is doing

im even embarressed to say he is my president...

:no:

[manu1959]

I think its great that there are more demecratic people in congress...
i think that just might stop bush from sending troops to iraq
iraq is a waste of money
To just ask you this simple question
why are we in war??
Is there a reason...??
NO i dont think so...
i bet the president is profiting off the
oil in iraq
thats the only common sense in this dumb wasteless war
its not even a war we are
just sitting there waiting and having our troops killed
he may not understand cause those
arent his kids fighting
i wonder why he wont send them??
I just think it a bunch of **** that our president is doing
im even embarressed to say he is my president...
:no:

so you an american citizen? :lmao:

[Grumplestillskin]

The opposion of the war is coming from the liberal democrats and not from the American people. It's coming from the liberal controled media as well. And I BLAME THE DEMOCRATS AND THE MEDIA FOR EVERY AMERICAN KILLED IN IRAQ!

I blame the people that kill them...

[Grumplestillskin]

I speak as a former veteran and as the husband of an active duty Soldier. I've lost several friends and neighbors in Iraq and currently have several family members serving in theater. Don't throw your keyboard warrior, college republican bit at me.

And then there was silence:eek2:

[Abbey Marie]

I think its great that there are more demecratic people in congress...

i think that just might stop bush from sending troops to iraq

iraq is a waste of money

To just ask you this simple question

why are we in war??

Is there a reason...??

NO i dont think so...

i bet the president is profiting off the

oil in iraq

thats the only common sense in this dumb wasteless war

its not even a war we are

just sitting there waiting and having our troops killed

he may not understand cause those

arent his kids fighting

i wonder why he wont send them??

I just think it a bunch of **** that our president is doing

im even embarressed to say he is my president...

:no:

Pardon me, but where did you learn this bizarre form of sentence structure and lack of punctuation?

[Dilloduck]

Majority of Americans who think the war was a mistake > 50%. They are made up of Repubs, Dems, Cons, and Libs. It's not bullshit, it's reality. Look at the poll numbers.

61 percent oppose Iraq troop surge, poll finds (http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/ss/nationworld/38046.php)


Seven-in-Ten Americans Would Exit Iraq in 2008 (http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=14333)


The CBS poll shows 43-percent of Americans want the nation to keep fighting the war but with a different strategy. 52-percent says it’s time for the US to start ending its involvement. Only three-percent want us to continue on the same course and two out of three now believe that it wasn’t worth it to remove Saddam Hussein from power. (http://www.kyw1060.com/pages/179714.php?contentType=4&contentId=285601)


More troops unhappy with Bush's course in Iraq, poll finds (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-29-poll-iraq_x.htm?csp=34)

A majority of people don't know what they are talking about when it comes to geopolitics and waging war.

[Grumplestillskin]

A majority of people don't know what they are talking about when it comes to geopolitics and waging war.

Do you?

[Dilloduck]

Do you?

Certainly not.

[MtnBiker]

im even embarressed to say he is my president...



So who did you vote for?

[Dilloduck]

Do you?

How about you Grump? Would you be comfortable if our generals or politicians looked to you for advice and followed it ? Do you know enough to make the call and be responsible for the results ?

[Gaffer]

Fortunately Bush doesn't make his decissions based on polls. Most people on the street couldn't even tell you who nancy poloski is or dick channey. For that matter ask em who their own senator is. The media tells em iraq is bad so they think it is.

ijusttiredofBush sounds like an arab troll. Wonder if I can get him excited?

:pee: mohamad

[Dilloduck]

How about you Grump? Would you be comfortable if our generals or politicians looked to you for advice and followed it ? Do you know enough to make the call and be responsible for the results ?

Silence ?? :eek2:

[Gaffer]

As I said I blame the dems and the media for all loses since saddam was taken down. They work together so they share the blame.

* 4th Iraqi Army Division Forces, with coalition advisors, captured seven members of an improvised explosive device cell during operations Jan. 6 in Samarra. The suspects are responsible for coordinating and conducting IED attacks against Iraqi civilians and security forces.
* Elements of Multi-National Division-Baghdad, along with Iraqi Army elements, conducted a clearing operation designed to disrupt insurgent activities and deny urban support zones to terrorists from Jan. 1 to Jan. 5 in Hurriya, a northwestern neighborhood of the Iraqi capital.

Results:
o Detained 16 suspected insurgents
o Soldiers confiscated illegal arms to include: 13 rocket propelled-grenade launchers, 17 AK-47’s with 20 AK-47 magazines, five rifles, two machine guns, 19 pistols, six mortars, and 12 blocks of C-4 explosives. They also seized three rocket-propelled grenades, two rocket-propelled grenade stabilizer shafts, and six rocket-propelled grenade booster rockets, along with identification cards, maps, insurgent propaganda, and 3.25 million Iraqi Dinar and $2,200 in U.S. currency.
o With the support of Task Force 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, Iraqi troops provided medical care to the local population. Iraqi medics treated and gave medication out to approximately 2,000 Iraqi civilians during this operation.
* Soldiers from the 3rd Battalion, 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division and Troop B, “Black Hawks,” 1st Squadron, 89th Calvary Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry) detained 82 suspects terrorists during a combat operation north of Yusufiyah, Iraq Jan. 2.
* Coalition forces found and destroyed a cache used for manufacturing and assembling improvised explosive devices in the Ghazaliyah neighborhood in western Baghdad Jan. 5. Soldiers from Company D, 2nd Battalion, 12th Cavalry Division, attached to the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, found approximately 200 pounds of unknown explosives dispersed between two houses near the Al-Shadra Mosque in Ghazaliyah.
o In addition to the 200 pounds of homemade explosives, the Soldiers found washing machine timers, Iraqna cell phone cards, passports, hundreds of blasting caps, time fuses, detonation cords and numerous physics and engineering books.
* Soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division and Battery A, 2nd Battalion, 15th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), detained the two suspects during a joint operation west of Mahmudiyah, Iraq. The operation targeted improvised explosive device cells operating near the town. Through intelligence provided by the Iraqi Army, troops worked with local residents of the area to help identify and detain the first suspect detained.
* Iraqi national policemen captured four men and seized a sizeable weapons cache at a checkpoint in southeastern Baghdad Jan. 5. Elements of the 3rd Battalion, 6th Brigade, 2nd National Police Division detained four men at a checkpoint in the Hadar neighborhood. The men were detained after illegal weapons and terrorist propaganda materials were found in their cars following a search at the police checkpoint.
The search of the suspects’ two vehicles resulted in the capture of a sniper rifle, a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, three assault rifles, assorted ammunition, weapons magazines and bomb-making materials.
* During ongoing operations south of Balad Ruz, Soldiers from the 1st Brigade, 5th Iraqi Army, with support from coalition forces, continue to clear the objective area, targeting specific terrorist cells which historically use the area as a safe haven to conduct random attacks against the local population and maintain a supply base.

The current operations began Jan. 4, with a combined air and ground assault into the area in the outskirts of Turki village. IA and CF Soldiers established mobile and stationary positions along possible escape routes to isolate the area and facilitated the searching of the area for weapon supplies, improvised explosive device-making material and terrorists.

“The terrorists believe we will not attack them in their safe havens and believe they can use these areas to spread violence throughout the region,” said Col. David W. Sutherland, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division commander, and senior U.S. Army officer in the Diyala province. “The 5th Iraqi Army Division believes that we must continue to take the fight to those individuals that use violence against the Iraqi people for their own personal and financial gain. The Coalition Forces will continue to support this Iraqi Force.”
* Soldiers of the 1st Squadron, 89th Cavalry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (LI) conducted a nighttime raid on a Baghdad meat-packaging facility suspected of being a terrorist meeting place in the Al Rashid district Jan. 7.

The 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division concurrently assaulted the salt factory next door, also a suspected terrorist planning area. Joining the two U.S. units on the operation were members of the 3rd Battalion, 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division. The two-pronged joint assault netted 32 detainees and more than 20 weapons, including 11 AK-47s, a Kalishnikov assault rifle, two Russian-made carbines, 15 60mm mortar rounds and a submachine gun.

The men detained, some of whom were guards at the building, were held on suspicion that they were allowing the buildings to be used as a terrorist rendezvous point, a suspicion strengthened by the weapons found in the area.

http://www.floppingaces.net/

This is the news and facts not reported by the media. This gets reduced down to a one paragraph blurb. While the media reports on some bodies found and a shooting or two in great detail. And polls that Americans want the troops out.

Nowhere in the MSM are there stories of the great work the soldiers do and details about their actions. They only make the news when they get killed so they can be part of the tally.

[5stringJeff]

I speak as a former veteran and as the husband of an active duty Soldier. I've lost several friends and neighbors in Iraq and currently have several family members serving in theater. Don't throw your keyboard warrior, college republican bit at me.

I'll answer for dmp, since I know him. He happens to be a veteran, having served an overseas tour. I know he has several friends/colleagues who have deployed. So when he speaks about the military, he speaks from the veteran standpoint as well. So do I, having served five years on active duty. So do a few others around here. You aren't the only vet on this MB.

[dirt mcgirt]

I'll answer for dmp, since I know him. He happens to be a veteran, having served an overseas tour. I know he has several friends/colleagues who have deployed. So when he speaks about the military, he speaks from the veteran standpoint as well. So do I, having served five years on active duty. So do a few others around here. You aren't the only vet on this MB.
I never claimed to be the only vet on the board, nor was I naive enough to think that I was the only one. The military jargon, sigs, and user names here make that a pretty obvious assuption. I wasn't trying to assert any moral authority, just letting DNP know that I wasn't sitting "in my safe harbor and sharp-shooting" by any means.

[Gunny]

It's a clear majority of Americans, both Repub, Dem, liberal, and con, who now think the war was a mistake. Blaming the democrats and the media for every American killed in Iraq would be intellectually dishonest. This war was poorly planned and conducted in an ineffective manner. Like it or not, the Repubs had a clear majority during Iraq and the Dumbocrats were nothing more than powerless dweebs. This latest troop surge should have happened two years ago when it mattered. An additional 100,000 troops were needed to seal the borders and provide extra security in the city. We came in there ill-equipped and unprepared. Our Soldiers never should have had to personally buy body armor from US Cavalry or e-bay and have it shipped over from the States. The Iraqi Army never should have been disbanded. And Al Sadr should have been taken out from the get go. The libtards had nothing to do with those blunders.

Blaming the democrats/libs and MSM for people having a Loser mentality where Iraq is concerned is more than a fair assessment.

[Abbey Marie]

I never claimed to be the only vet on the board, nor was I naive enough to think that I was the only one. The military jargon, sigs, and user names here make that a pretty obvious assuption. I wasn't trying to assert any moral authority, just letting DNP know that I wasn't sitting "in my safe harbor and sharp-shooting" by any means.

Calling Darin a "keyboard warrior college Republican" sure sounds to me like an assertion that he isn't a vet.

[Gunny]

I think its great that there are more demecratic people in congress...

i think that just might stop bush from sending troops to iraq

iraq is a waste of money

To just ask you this simple question

why are we in war??

Is there a reason...??

NO i dont think so...

i bet the president is profiting off the

oil in iraq

thats the only common sense in this dumb wasteless war

its not even a war we are

just sitting there waiting and having our troops killed

he may not understand cause those

arent his kids fighting

i wonder why he wont send them??

I just think it a bunch of **** that our president is doing

im even embarressed to say he is my president...

:no:

go away, moron.

[Gunny]

How about you Grump? Would you be comfortable if our generals or politicians looked to you for advice and followed it ? Do you know enough to make the call and be responsible for the results ?

If they would carry out the strategy and tactics I laid out? Damned rights I'd take the responsibility. Hell, put me back in uniform, give me my weapon and I'll lead the damned thing from the front.

[Gunny]

I'll answer for dmp, since I know him. He happens to be a veteran, having served an overseas tour. I know he has several friends/colleagues who have deployed. So when he speaks about the military, he speaks from the veteran standpoint as well. So do I, having served five years on active duty. So do a few others around here. You aren't the only vet on this MB.

Sssshhhhh .... it's a secret.:no:

[Grumplestillskin]

Calling Darin a "keyboard warrior college Republican" sure sounds to me like an assertion that he isn't a vet.

And Darin's "safe harbour" snipe doesn't deserve a response? Mayhap Darin sounds exactly like that on occasion (a keyboard warrior college Republican).....:eek:

[Grumplestillskin]

How about you Grump? Would you be comfortable if our generals or politicians looked to you for advice and followed it ? Do you know enough to make the call and be responsible for the results ?

Other than telling them not to go in the first place, and come home now, no, I wouldn't. I'd let Gunny and CSM do it...:wink2:

[Abbey Marie]

And Darin's "safe harbour" snipe doesn't deserve a response? Mayhap Darin sounds exactly like that on occasion (a keyboard warrior college Republican).....:eek:

I'm glad to see that you agree that keyboard warrior was a condescending, "I'm a vet and you're not" remark.

[Gaffer]

If they would carry out the strategy and tactics I laid out? Damned rights I'd take the responsibility. Hell, put me back in uniform, give me my weapon and I'll lead the damned thing from the front.

I'm with ya Gunny. You take the left flank I'll take the right. The one bad thing about getting old is not being able to go back in.

[Grumplestillskin]

I'm glad to see that you agree that keyboard warrior was a condescending, "I'm a vet and you're not" remark.

Unlike Darin's original post, right?

[Abbey Marie]

Unlike Darin's original post, right?

Right.

[Grumplestillskin]

Right.

I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn...

[Gunny]

I'm with ya Gunny. You take the left flank I'll take the right. The one bad thing about getting old is not being able to go back in.

First thing I'd do is hand the troops the keys to cuffs that keep their hands tied behind their backs. Let's see what "insurgents" can do against some REAL search and destroy without a bunch of pansy-ass rules to go with it.

[Gaffer]

First thing I'd do is hand the troops the keys to cuffs that keep their hands tied behind their backs. Let's see what "insurgents" can do against some REAL search and destroy without a bunch of pansy-ass rules to go with it.

And kick out the liberal reporters and the lawyers. Time to kick ass and take names and don't worry about your back cause its covered.

Search and destroy is not pc, so that's exactly what I would call the operations.

[Gunny]

And kick out the liberal reporters and the lawyers. Time to kick ass and take names and don't worry about your back cause its covered.

Search and destroy is not pc, so that's exactly what I would call the operations.


LOL ... probably why we're sitting home right now too.

[Gaffer]

LOL ... probably why we're sitting home right now too.

Yep cause we know what to do and how to do it. :D

But we're here anytime they want to fight a real war.

[Gunny]

Yep cause we know what to do and how to do it. :D

But we're here anytime they want to fight a real war.

Yeah, but we'd win, then WHAT would they do?

Of course, the ledties would spend decades trying to bring us up on war crimes charges.:laugh:

[Gaffer]

Lefties? what lefties? :dunno:

[Gunny]

Lefties? what lefties? :dunno:

If you're going to think big, might as well think REAL big.:laugh:

[Gaffer]

If you're going to think big, might as well think REAL big.:laugh:

No sense doing it half ass

[dirt mcgirt]

I'm glad to see that you agree that keyboard warrior was a condescending, "I'm a vet and you're not" remark.
I'm sure DNP can speak for himself. I've got no beef with him and DNP's initial remarks to me were just as condenscending.

[dirt mcgirt]

Blaming the democrats/libs and MSM for people having a Loser mentality where Iraq is concerned is more than a fair assessment.
So who do you blame for your "Iraqis aren't capable of adopting democracy" mentality?

Pretty funny watching all the Repubs talk about individual responsibility and pulling ones self up by the bootstraps but then blaming the minority party and the MSM for the failures in Iraq.

[Gunny]

So who do you blame for your "Iraqis aren't capable of adopting democracy" mentality?

Pretty funny watching all the Repubs talk about individual responsibility and pulling ones self up by the bootstraps but then blaming the minority party and the MSM for the failures in Iraq.

Mentality? Blame? If I was going to blame anyone-or-thing on this point, I would blame all those not-so-very-insightful Americns who cannot comprehend that a people raised in a different culture hold different core beliefs and aren't going to willingly accept someone rolling in and telling them that what we believe is better because we say so.

The inability of the Western mind to accept or even somewhat understand that not everyone in the world holds our same core beliefs is at the root of the problem, and pretty obvious to anyone who actually LOOKS at it.

Instead, you have the usual PC bunch who refuse to accept the fact right and wrong, good and bad in Arab culture do not always correspond with right and wrong, good and bad in Western culture.

Western-style democracy is an invention of culture, not an inherent belief.

When the numerical minority party has the loudest voice via biased media, it's pretty damned-easy to call that spade a spade.

And jsut to clear it up for you, I'm not a Republican. The last political party I was actually registered as a member of was the Democrat party. That ought to get your gears whirring and smoking.

[dirt mcgirt]

Mentality? Blame? If I was going to blame anyone-or-thing on this point, I would blame all those not-so-very-insightful Americns who cannot comprehend that a people raised in a different culture hold different core beliefs and aren't going to willingly accept someone rolling in and telling them that what we believe is better because we say so.

The inability of the Western mind to accept or even somewhat understand that not everyone in the world holds our same core beliefs is at the root of the problem, and pretty obvious to anyone who actually LOOKS at it.

Instead, you have the usual PC bunch who refuse to accept the fact right and wrong, good and bad in Arab culture do not always correspond with right and wrong, good and bad in Western culture.

Western-style democracy is an invention of culture, not an inherent belief.
Wow, Gunny. You sounded just like an anti-war liberal there. Did you hug any trees today?

[Abbey Marie]

Wow, Gunny. You sounded just like an anti-war liberal there. Did you hug any trees today?

Gunny, if you do any tree-hugging, I want pictures! :D

[Gunny]

Wow, Gunny. You sounded just like an anti-war liberal there. Did you hug any trees today?

Nothing anti-war liberal about it. One of the very first, basic tenets of engaging an enemy is knowing him. Political correctness does not allow for that since it includes calling Arabs "Arabs" and Islam a religion of hate. Since we cannot say those things without the MSM crawling up every orifice of our bodies, we have to pretend they aren't who and what they are.

Sound tactical doctrine has nothing to do with politics.

[Gunny]

Gunny, if you do any tree-hugging, I want pictures! :D

I don't hug potential firewood.:mad:

[dirt mcgirt]

Nothing anti-war liberal about it. One of the very first, basic tenets of engaging an enemy is knowing him. Political correctness does not allow for that since it includes calling Arabs "Arabs" and Islam a religion of hate. Since we cannot say those things without the MSM crawling up every orifice of our bodies, we have to pretend they aren't who and what they are.

Sound tactical doctrine has nothing to do with politics.
So you spout Confucious and talk about knowing your enemy while painting Arabs and Islam with broad brushstrokes. LMAO. :D

[Gunny]

So you spout Confucious and talk about knowing your enemy while painting Arabs and Islam with broad brushstrokes. LMAO. :D

Makes pretty good sense to judge by the rule and not the exceptions.

But you keep on pretending they're something other than what they are so you can get a gold star by that on your PC Checklist. YOU are one of the problems previously identified.

[dirt mcgirt]

Makes pretty good sense to judge by the rule and not the exceptions.

But you keep on pretending they're something other than what they are so you can get a gold star by that on your PC Checklist. YOU are one of the problems previously identified.
Actually it's your inability to distinguish and differentiate the groups that's the problem. If you think that about all Arabs and all Muslims, then why don't you advocate a pull out and nuking them all?

[Gunny]

Actually it's your inability to distinguish and differentiate the groups that's the problem. If you think that about all Arabs and all Muslims, then why don't you advocate a pull out and nuking them all?

You're trying to play semantics, attempting to use technical levels as a means of misdirection. We were speaking in general, not identifying each and every tribe, religious sect, ethnicity, Nationality, etc of each and every individual in Iraq.

I DO differentiate between each religious sect, tribal group, combatants vs noncombatants, and Islamofascists from outside Iraq influencing the violence, or I WOULD BE for nuking them all.

The bad guys, regardless which sect, group, tribe, ethnicity, or whatever they belong to need to be hunted down and killed. If there is collateral damage, that is the price of war. If it pushes some to become militant extremists then they just add themselves to the target list.

Nothing is ever going to be accomplished as long as you want to have your cake and eat it too, and nothing has been accomplished from it.

Maybe some of you newbies need to listen to some of us dinosaurs and learn how to fight to win instead of all this political mollycoddling you espouse.

As I said before, you offer no solution, just an impossible situation.

[Gaffer]

If I were going to nuke any place it would be iran. Take off the head you kill the body. Two thirds if the terror organizations are supported and funded by them. That is an absolute fact. Yet they are still in existance and NOBODY does anything about them. It wouldn't be pc to just pre-emtively take them out. pre-emptively taking out hussien was the most evil thing the US has ever done according to the rest of the world and our own wonderful liberals.

[dirt mcgirt]

You're trying to play semantics, attempting to use technical levels as a means of misdirection. We were speaking in general, not identifying each and every tribe, religious sect, ethnicity, Nationality, etc of each and every individual in Iraq.

I DO differentiate between each religious sect, tribal group, combatants vs noncombatants, and Islamofascists from outside Iraq influencing the violence, or I WOULD BE for nuking them all.

The bad guys, regardless which sect, group, tribe, ethnicity, or whatever they belong to need to be hunted down and killed. If there is collateral damage, that is the price of war. If it pushes some to become militant extremists then they just add themselves to the target list.

Nothing is ever going to be accomplished as long as you want to have your cake and eat it too, and nothing has been accomplished from it.

Maybe some of you newbies need to listen to some of us dinosaurs and learn how to fight to win instead of all this political mollycoddling you espouse.

As I said before, you offer no solution, just an impossible situation.
No, I offered my opinion on what we should do. I said we should move the troops to the borders, seal them off, and decentralize the forces to act as command and control for the Iraqi security forces. We can also take another 50,000 Iraqis, train them out of country, and bring them back when their training is complete.

This isn't about PC mollycoddling. I've stated repeatedly we aren't trying to engage an enemy on the battlefield, we're trying to build a Democracy. Flattening cities like Fallujah undermines our objectives. Writing people off as collateral damage undermines our objectives. Not because of the "humanitarian aspect" or because it's "PC", it's about stopping ordinary civilians from joining the insurgency and attacking our troops with IED's and sniperfire. It's about curbing the sectarian violence that stops us from fulfilling the objective. That "Bring 'em on" mentality didn't work back then and it isn't working now. The military has an internal report about the mistakes in Iraq and are implementing a new counter-insurgency manual. All of these things seem to go against everything you're arguing. Perhaps you should write our military leaders and tell them that they're wrong.

[Gunny]

No, I offered my opinion on what we should do. I said we should move the troops to the borders, seal them off, and decentralize the forces to act as command and control for the Iraqi security forces. We can also take another 50,000 Iraqis, train them out of country, and bring them back when their training is complete.

This isn't about PC mollycoddling. I've stated repeatedly we aren't trying to engage an enemy on the battlefield, we're trying to build a Democracy. Flattening cities like Fallujah undermines our objectives. Writing people off as collateral damage undermines our objectives. Not because of the "humanitarian aspect" or because it's "PC", it's about stopping ordinary civilians from joining the insurgency and attacking our troops with IED's and sniperfire. It's about curbing the sectarian violence that stops us from fulfilling the objective. That "Bring 'em on" mentality didn't work back then and it isn't working now. The military has an internal report about the mistakes in Iraq and are implementing a new counter-insurgency manual. All of these things seem to go against everything you're arguing. Perhaps you should write our military leaders and tell them that they're wrong.

Instead of being a contrarian, why don't you just post your opinion up front; which, as opposed to your claim, you have not. Don't want to be seen as agreeable?

I don't see a whole lot wrong with your opinion except as noted before that "bring 'em on mentality" most assuredly has worked for countless centuries, and most recently in Europe and Japan.

And if our military leaders are so right, then how come they aren't succeeding?

All I'm hearing from you is you newbies are so lost in your technology and psychoanalysis you've forgotten how to win a simple sword fight.

[dirt mcgirt]

Instead of being a contrarian, why don't you just post your opinion up front; which, as opposed to your claim, you have not. Don't want to be seen as agreeable?

I don't see a whole lot wrong with your opinion except as noted before that "bring 'em on mentality" most assuredly has worked for countless centuries, and most recently in Europe and Japan.

And if our military leaders are so right, then how come they aren't succeeding?

All I'm hearing from you is you newbies are so lost in your technology and psychoanalysis you've forgotten how to win a simple sword fight.
Our military leaders are not succeeding because they employed the very tactics that you're saying they're not employing. And I'm not being a contrarian, you're the one trying to pawn conventional warfare tactics off as applicable to the nation building mission. Ummm, hello, Earth to Gunny, this is Operation Iraqi Freedom not Operation Kill Everything That Moves. Iraq isn't Europe or Japan and this isn't a simple sword fight. The enemy is hiding within the civilian population and engaging our troops with IED's and sniper rifles for Christ's sake. The military isn't using battlefield tactics within the civilian population, not because it's "unPC," but because it leads to a high rate of civilian casualties and because they've learned that for every 'x' number of civilians or non-combatants they unintentional kill, they create an insurgent or militant in their place. Although the Pentagon doesn't keep track of civilian casualties, Bush estimated that about 35,000 civilians died last year and depending on who you ask, estimates range from 100,000 to 600,000 total civilian casualties since the war began. And aside from the "PC" humanitarian toll, in military terms that logically equates to a lot of fucking insurgents and a lot of fucking IED's. It's not like we can issue a declaratoin of war to the insurgency and tell them to bring all their equipment and vehicles out to the desert and settle it Geneva Conventions style. The military recognizes this which is why they're abandoning reactive conventional warfare tactics for these new proactive counter-insurgency tactics.

[Gunny]

Our military leaders are not succeeding because they employed the very tactics that you're saying they're not employing. And I'm not being a contrarian, you're the one trying to pawn conventional warfare tactics off as applicable to the nation building mission. Ummm, hello, Earth to Gunny, this is Operation Iraqi Freedom not Operation Kill Everything That Moves. Iraq isn't Europe or Japan and this isn't a simple sword fight. The enemy is hiding within the civilian population and engaging our troops with IED's and sniper rifles for Christ's sake. The military isn't using battlefield tactics within the civilian population, not because it's "unPC," but because it leads to a high rate of civilian casualties and because they've learned that for every 'x' number of civilians or non-combatants they unintentional kill, they create an insurgent or militant in their place. Although the Pentagon doesn't keep track of civilian casualties, Bush estimated that about 35,000 civilians died last year and depending on who you ask, estimates range from 100,000 to 600,000 total civilian casualties since the war began. And aside from the "PC" humanitarian toll, in military terms that logically equates to a lot of fucking insurgents and a lot of fucking IED's. It's not like we can issue a declaratoin of war to the insurgency and tell them to bring all their equipment and vehicles out to the desert and settle it Geneva Conventions style. The military recognizes this which is why they're abandoning reactive conventional warfare tactics for these new proactive counter-insurgency tactics.

:laugh: You're talking circles and making no new points. I understand perfectly well what the situation in Iraq is, and I understand perfectly well what's trying to be done about it.

Speaking of "Earth to dirt" .... Isn't working, is it? Hmmmm.......

When y'all newbie, techno-geniuses get done out-guessing yourselves and your asses are kicked real good, you STILL won't get it. Youll just be all full of excuses and "how come's," and run back to your computers and over-analyze the shit out of what went wrong.