The Dixie Chicks should be President

[lazs2]

skyrock... with over 70 hours a month playing AH.... I would say your butt is probly the fatter of us two's.

westmoreland?   No... more like abrams.  you need to read sorleys "A better war' to get some perspective on westmoreland vs Abrams.

The Abrams method will work... but..  again, I ask..

What is your solution to iraq?  how will surrendering help anyone anywhere except islamofacists?

And.. how is doing the opposite of what the generals and the troops want us to do "supporting the troops"?

It is easy to criticize... I am failing to see any solutions here tho.  Moray had some laughable soudbites...

Perhaps you can do better?

lazs

[Yknurd]

Keep thinking leadpig, you'll think of some witty quip eventually!!1

[indy007]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
I'm voting McCain so far.  

If he got elected, and managed to serve 2 terms, he'd be 80 years old when his term was over.

Wow that's old.

[SkyRock]

Originally posted by lazs2
skyrock.


 how will surrendering help anyone anywhere except islamofacists?

And.. how is doing the opposite of what the generals and the troops want us to do "supporting the troops"?



lazs

For one, I do not condone surrendering, as we have no land that is ours over there to surrender, so stop with the twisting.  

Secondly, I am not sure where you are getting that the troops want us to stay over there, I mean I can understand that they do not want it to look like a defeat but every single person I know that has been over there does not want to go back and tells me it is FUBAR over there.  Just today a soldier was quoted, "We're hoping what we're doing here is helping keep them on our side, rather than have them go into full-blown chaos,"  and one quoted, "They don't understand what it is [like] driving down the road and to wonder if you are going to get blown up or not", and my personal friend told me, "The first time I was there was when we entered the capital and we felt good, the second time I was there, it was like  totally different place with the constant threat of roadside bombs, evey minute of every day when you're moving, you wonder is this the moment I get blown up."  Lazs, it has always been that war creates a certain psychological dependancy on continuing the war.  For example, if soldiers have to pull out of an area, they feel a great sense of loss, because of the blood sweat and tears and lives lost.  So at what point does the cost not equal the outcome???  Are we staying so that the IRAQi's can have a democratic government?  I would say that is impossible.  Are we staying so that we can save face?  We should already know better than that.  
If we could take a poll from soldiers serving there now, as to who would like to go home, what do you think the majority of answers would be?  The middle east is a screwed up place.  Islamic fundamentalists are screwed up people.  There is not much hope beyond nuking the entire country for a lasting peace there, and that is not realistic.  I believe firmly that having troops on the ground will deter us from our long term goals in fighting terrorists.  I believe that we should secure our borders and fight them from an intellegence standpoint.  Assasinations, kidnappings, and whatever else it takes covertly to accomplish our intellegence gathering is the only way to go with these pukes.  Fight fire with fire!  It has worked for the Isreali's for decades.  

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by SkyRock
Compare the first 4 years of vietnam to the first 4 years of IRAQ, sir.

Yet another who doesn't know his history.

Vietnam War 1964-1975

1964 206      
1965 1,863
1966 6,144
1967 11,153

first four years 19,366

Of course, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed in August 1964, so to be fair, only 1/3 of 1964's casualties should be counted.

But then we have to add 2/3 of the 16,589 who were killed in 1968.

You weren't going to count the years since '57 when we had nowhere near the force strength to be comparable to that which we have in Iraq....


were you?

[Tango]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Yet another who doesn't know his history.

Vietnam War 1964-1975

1964 206      
1965 1,863
1966 6,144
1967 11,153

first four years 19,366

Of course, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed in August 1964, so to be fair, only 1/3 of 1964's casualties should be counted.

But then we have to add 2/3 of the 16,589 who were killed in 1968.

You weren't going to count the years since '57 when we had nowhere near the force strength to be comparable to that which we have in Iraq....


were you?

I wonder when skyrocks gonna stop debating ya and start with the insults?

[LEADPIG]

So far me and Skyrock are the ones getting called stupid.

[john9001]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
So far me and Skyrock are the ones getting called stupid.

well, forrest gump said.........................

[LEADPIG]

I knew it !!!!!!:confused:

[Tango]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
So far me and Skyrock are the ones getting called stupid.

I didn't refer to you LP. I don't agree with your positions but skyrock doesn't debate he simply resorts to insults when things don't go his way.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
So far me and Skyrock are the ones getting called stupid.

It's Skyrock and  I

[Tango]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
It's Skyrock and  I

alright SA.

[SkyRock]

Originally posted by Tango
I wonder when skyrocks gonna stop debating ya and start with the insults?

when he says something along the lines of......the democrats arethe cause of all ills of the world......when we are discussing a situation that involves all americans!:aok

[SkyRock]

Originally posted by Tango
I didn't refer to you LP. I don't agree with your positions but skyrock doesn't debate he simply resorts to insults when things don't go his way.

lie some more, you brought up dems of the past when we were discussing IRAQ today.  Now, if you want to anklehump me in the O'club, go ahead Im used to it!:aok

[lazs2]

skyrock...  if you took a poll of anyone who was working and asked em if the would rather be home... I bet you would get the "I'd rather be home"

If you asked the troops if we should be there and if we are doing good and should we stay.. that would be entirely different.

But... you have not answered the question at all.... what good would having our last plane out shot at do?  what good would abandoning the iraqis and letting the region go to the terrorists do?    what good would come of not having boots on the ground?   of leaving before sufficeient iraqi troops were trained.

you have no answer... you only want to leave because...well... who knows?   you won't answer.    You say we can then fight them like the jews do?   You do see the difference tho right?  they are a little closer to the problem right?  more like "boots on the ground"?

I have told you that to send smart bombs or groups of special forces would not work.. that the new york times and cnn would be calling us murdering barbarians every day... worse than now even..

you simply have no solution... you can only criticize... and then... only with soundbites and in almost unreadable blocks of text.

I have talked to dozens of soldiers who have been there.. some for two or more tours and that is where I get my opinion... I have listened to Petraeus the last two days...

I have heard you claim that I need to get off my fat butt while you rack up 70 hours a month playing AH.   But then...you are simply improving your hand and eye co-ordination so that.... someday... if you ever decide to go outside... you will be a wiz at all sorts of sports and skilzzz.

lazs