/dev/null Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 If only because it's the VP debate, which is only slightly less meaningful than some of the arguments here. Until a week ago VP debates were meaningless. Then they became all important in the hopes that momentum shifts back to the Democratic ticket. After a couple days of spinning a decisive Biden victory, which few will believe, the VP debate will once again be irrelevant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Until a week ago VP debates were meaningless. Then they became all important in the hopes that momentum shifts back to the Democratic ticket. After a couple days of spinning a decisive Biden victory, which few will believe, the VP debate will once again be irrelevant Is this your first election? hehe...it's VP debate night and that's what they're covering (read: selling) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 And it begins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 On Afghanistan...he had his attack line cocked: We brought American troops home, and had less American troops there to fight. Biden wasn't having it...yes....and we are going to continue to do so. There will be a larger proportion of Afghan troops doing stuff...and soon, it will be all them, b/c it's been 11 years and we're about done. Once strategy 1 failed...ignore that we're transitioning to Afghan troops...there was...nothing. He was going to sit there and complain our troops are coming home? You can't do that. The truth is there is no real way to argue with ending wars, and not having new ones. Thank god. I've never heard of winning wars...by having less reliable troops than the enemy. Purposely putting more green, or undisciplined, or even traitorous troops in their place? Must have missed that day. Now, if we are going to talk about getting out, and not winning? Then just GTFO. This "transition" crap is retarded. This is how we turn this into Viet Nam, and take casualties for no reason. You can't fight limited wars. Better to just haul ass, battalion column, right now. IF our objective is to kill as many of them as we can before we leave...you don't do that with less troops. Why wouldn't we just do a full deployment, wail on them, and then get everybody out? This is going to leave some sorry-assed platoon, cut off, and taking fire, and calling in fire on their own position = total nightmare. I don't see how this costs less $, lives, stress...anything. No. What we have here, is political calculation...and F'ing about with a lot of kid's lives...for next to 0 strategic benefit. Soldiers fight wars to win, they don't measure their existence in terms of coming home for political expedience. What do we tell our company commanders? Hang out for the next 2 years...and try not to get enough of your people killed to make headlines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 I dunno if I missed it or it came earlier but I'm seeing the "we didn't know they needed more security" line out of Biden picking up traction quickly elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCtemaHgjyA&sns=em And it begins I Disagree with those who say that Joe's constant interrupting and laughing painted Biden as the experience veteran, and was effective, and won't matter with voters. IT IS ALL that is going to be taken away from this debate. Its more like "nice try Mr. V.P., but here in the Bigs, you can't fake your way through 90 minutes" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) I've never heard of winning wars...by having less reliable troops than the enemy. Purposely putting more green, or undisciplined, or even traitorous troops in their place? Must have missed that day. Now, if we are going to talk about getting out, and not winning? Then just GTFO. This "transition" crap is retarded. This is how we turn this into Viet Nam, and take casualties for no reason. You can't fight limited wars. Better to just haul ass, battalion column, right now. IF our objective is to kill as many of them as we can before we leave...you don't do that with less troops. Why wouldn't we just do a full deployment, wail on them, and then get everybody out? This is going to leave some sorry-assed platoon, cut off, and taking fire, and calling in fire on their own position = total nightmare. I don't see how this costs less $, lives, stress...anything. No. What we have here, is political calculation...and F'ing about with a lot of kid's lives...for next to 0 strategic benefit. Soldiers fight wars to win, they don't measure their existence in terms of coming home for political expedience. What do we tell our company commanders? Hang out for the next 2 years...and try not to get enough of your people killed to make headlines? Ya we're going to "win" ... we're going to permanently transform Afghanistan into a metropolis and kill "all of them" w/ ground troops. That's reality It's been 11 years in freaking Afghanistan...I think it's been long enough. Edited October 12, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=La_H6EdZI_Q LOL, I really don't care btw to argue about who "won the VP debate" b/c it really is like arguing who is better the Bills or the Dolphins...it just doesn't matter. But all I'll say to you, and OC...who seem fixated on this CNN focus group of "undecideds" ... when Tuesday comes around...no matter what...we should all agree...do not link to or refer to them or the CNN "meter" they control ever...and the board will be better for it.... I mean...seriously..."lets hear all about what some 'undecided' voters who the media rounds up have to say that's a good idea that's how to make sense of what we watch!" Once again...not trying to lay on any of you or even debate who won tonight b/c it really, really, doesn't matter. But for next Tuesday...lets all agree to not watch CNN. (and I actually like CNN on Sundays) Edited October 12, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 LOL, I really don't care btw to argue about who "won the VP debate" b/c it really is like arguing who is better the Bills or the Dolphins...it just doesn't matter. But all I'll say to you, and OC...who seem fixated on this CNN focus group of "undecideds" ... when Tuesday comes around...no matter what...we should all agree...do not link to or refer to them or the CNN "meter" they control ever...and the board will be better for it.... I mean...seriously..."lets hear all about what some 'undecided' voters who the media rounds up have to say that's a good idea that's how to make sense of what we watch!" Once again...not trying to lay on any of you or even debate who won tonight b/c it really, really, doesn't matter. But for next Tuesday...lets all agree to not watch CNN. (and I actually like CNN on Sundays) Fixated? I just found it funny that she called him a buffoon. In all honesty. It felt more like din arguing with magox. I also agree somewhat with you on the foreign policy but that doesn't matter. When the economy is ****, everything else is just details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 Ya we're going to "win" ... we're going to permanently transform Afghanistan into a metropolis and kill "all of them" w/ ground troops. That's reality It's been 11 years in freaking Afghanistan...I think it's been long enough. If you're saying we need to leave, fine, but let's do it now. WTF good is decreasing our combat power, and then make our guys sit there for 2 years half-assed? I'd be bitching up a storm if I was running a company over there. Nobody would listen or care...but still If you're saying we need to win, then this ain't how. It appears Biden was saying we should "leave-win"....and I have no F'ing idea WTF that is, and most likely, neither does he. None of this is a "good answer", but leaving a company of our guys, out there by itself surrounded by supposed allies, with no back up, because "we can't spare the troops"...is Viet F'ing Nam. And, it's WW1 as well, when we trusted the French not to run(WTF were we thinking), and left a battalion in the woods by itself, and surrounded. Why on earth should we sign up for 2 years of Viet Nam, in trade for political expediency...and because you think it's been long enough?. This is a recipe for disaster, and you better not blame anybody but Obama for it if something bad happens. I hope these clowns get over, and their idiocy doesn't get a lot of people killed. I also hope that if he wins, Romney can bring in a buttload of air support or do something, that helps the guys who have to sit there and deal with this idiocy for the next 2 years. Or, I hope Romney says this is retarded and orders the withdrawal immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) If you're saying we need to leave, fine, but let's do it now. WTF good is decreasing our combat power, and then make our guys sit there for 2 years half-assed? I'd be bitching up a storm if I was running a company over there. Nobody would listen or care...but still If you're saying we need to win, then this ain't how. It appears Biden was saying we should "leave-win"....and I have no F'ing idea WTF that is, and most likely, neither does he. None of this is a "good answer", but leaving a company of our guys, out there by itself surrounded by supposed allies, with no back up, because "we can't spare the troops"...is Viet F'ing Nam. And, it's WW1 as well, when we trusted the French not to run(WTF were we thinking), and left a battalion in the woods by itself, and surrounded. Why on earth should we sign up for 2 years of Viet Nam, in trade for political expediency...and because you think it's been long enough?. This is a recipe for disaster, and you better not blame anybody but Obama for it if something bad happens. I hope these clowns get over, and their idiocy doesn't get a lot of people killed. I also hope that if he wins, Romney can bring in a buttload of air support or do something, that helps the guys who have to sit there and deal with this idiocy for the next 2 years. Or, I hope Romney says this is retarded and orders the withdrawal immediately. Look if Romney wins and says it's retarded and leaves...you'll not see me complaining ...you'll see me surprised but clapping. I don't know what you've been sold that there's some firefight where we're outgunned and surrounded....but it isn't what is going on. We're trying our best to train them (whatever you think about that...I'm not here saying they will ever be amazing), and increasing their role in actually doing stuff b/c soon they will have to do it all. It's really that simple. More Afghan, less US. I don't see what you are even arguing ... and air support? If there is anywhere on earth where there are bombs falling when we want them...it's there. Bottom line is our policy (from both men) is make one last push to set them up best as possible (despite everyone knowing they suck) and then just leave. There really isn't a difference. So to sit here and fake outrage like Ryan makes you look ... like Ryan. Leave that hell hole. ASAP. It's that simple. It's a dirt pile.That's basically what Biden said. IDK what the hell Ryan was saying...I know at one point something about "not loosing ground"...well...we're leaving and I'm ok w/ that...that's what I prefer...not to hold ground on a dirt hole. Edited October 12, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 LOL, I really don't care btw to argue about who "won the VP debate" b/c it really is like arguing who is better the Bills or the Dolphins...it just doesn't matter. But all I'll say to you, and OC...who seem fixated on this CNN focus group of "undecideds" ... when Tuesday comes around...no matter what...we should all agree...do not link to or refer to them or the CNN "meter" they control ever...and the board will be better for it.... I mean...seriously..."lets hear all about what some 'undecided' voters who the media rounds up have to say that's a good idea that's how to make sense of what we watch!" Once again...not trying to lay on any of you or even debate who won tonight b/c it really, really, doesn't matter. But for next Tuesday...lets all agree to not watch CNN. (and I actually like CNN on Sundays) Look, this ain't my video, take it up with meazza... And, we work with what we have. Here's a group of undecideds. This is what they say. Undecideds are what is important here, not pundits. I mean...what do you want me to do? IF you really hate CNN that much, I'll just use the focus group guy on Fox. MSNBC is completely useless. That's the last debate I spend looking at their coverage this year. I mean, I thought CNN was better, because I wouldn't hear the same old crap about Faux News. <Throw my hands up>Now, CNN ain't good enough either?</Throw my hands up> This may be a very big deal because of the reaction of women you can see for yourself, or it may mean nothing. It's a hell of a risk to take with them. Besides, Biden is now allowed to run free...who knows what he will say this weekend! By a week from now, that could be 3x more deadly than this. Hey, don't get pissed at me: It's Biden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Look, this ain't my video, take it up with meazza... And, we work with what we have. Here's a group of undecideds. This is what they say. Undecideds are what is important here, not pundits. I mean...what do you want me to do? IF you really hate CNN that much, I'll just use the focus group guy on Fox. MSNBC is completely useless. That's the last debate I spend looking at their coverage this year. I mean, I thought CNN was better, because I wouldn't hear the same old crap about Faux News. <Throw my hands up>Now, CNN ain't good enough either?</Throw my hands up> This may be a very big deal because of the reaction of women you can see for yourself, or it may mean nothing. It's a hell of a risk to take with them. Besides, Biden is now allowed to run free...who knows what he will say this weekend! By a week from now, that could be 3x more deadly than this. Hey, don't get pissed at me: It's Biden. Na, this may be crazy for you to hear but in my honest opinion, MSNBC and Fox both have better coverage than CNN. CNN frames the entire debate around some arbitrary meter that distracts viewers the entire time in the middle of the debate...then spends a bunch of time afterwords talking to idiots. These "undecided" focus groups...are idiots and (imo) not even reflective of actual people who can be persuaded. It's just nonsense. I get that networks will do stuff like this, but CNN frames the entire thing around it and you can't even watch it live w/ out an "undecided meter" doing God knows what telling you what to think based on what some idiots think. MSNBC, Fox News...PBS, Network television...it's ALL better than CNN. That's just my opinion. Hence my CNN rant. And like I said...I actually kind of like CNN...just not for debates. Fox and MSNBC both actually do debates ok (when compared to CNN) considering what they do the rest of the time...it's kind of strange.And like I said earlier...I mainly like CNN on Sundays anyway. Edited October 12, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 Look if Romney wins and says it's retarded and leaves...you'll not see me complaining ...you'll see me surprised but clapping. I don't know what you've been sold that there's some firefight where we're outgunned and surrounded....but it isn't what is going on. We're trying our best to train them (whatever you think about that...I'm not here saying they will ever be amazing), and increasing their role in actually doing stuff b/c soon they will have to do it all. It's really that simple. More Afghan, less US. I don't see what you are even arguing ... and air support? If there is anywhere on earth where there are bombs falling when we want them...it's there. Bottom line is our policy (from both men) is make one last push to set them up best as possible (despite everyone knowing they suck) and then just leave. There really isn't a difference. So to sit here and fake outrage like Ryan makes you look ... like Ryan. Leave that hell hole. ASAP. It's that simple. It's a dirt pile.That's basically what Biden said. IDK what the hell Ryan was saying...I know at one point something about "not loosing ground"...well...we're leaving and I'm ok w/ that...that's what I prefer...not to hold ground on a dirt hole. Sold? Try read. I've read about this. I've even had to "live" it in more ways than you may imagine. We've made this mistake before. Do you know anything about why I would call this Viet Nam, or refer to Lost Battalion? What can you tell me, honestly, that makes these guys any different than the ARVNs? I am not faking anything, and you've never seen me outraged. Put it this way, if I were, I wouldn't be F'ing about on a message board. No. is pretty much my thing...until it's not. Just got done watching this again. Biden is CLEARLY saying...that the mission does not change. The same mission...is the same mission. We have to do what we were doing 2 years ago, today, and for the next 2 years...with less, reliable troops. This is retarded. Even a civilian should be able to understand that less is not more, ever, in modern conventional combat. As I said, if we get over, and nothing happens, great! You got lucky. If not, then a lot of people will be killed for no good reason, and you'll be an idiot for supporting this idiocy. I'm not talking about one guy here or there. I'm talking about losing whole units, especially as the idiotic deadline approaches. I mean...why wouldn't they pull their own Tet Offensive....if they know we are leaving in 2 weeks? Moron Joe talking about Special Forces. We aren't fighting a special forces war here. We did that, in the first 6 months of this, 10 years ago. This is a company action war fought in a mountainous region. This is a regular army war, that we have been fighting with reserves and national guard. The more I think about this...it comes down to budget, really. They don't want to pay for it, but they know they can't just leave, so, they half-ass it for 2 years until the money runs out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 So... when do we go into Iran? I'm thinking right around December 21st, personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 I actually thought Palin did a better job against Biden than Ryan. Ryan, for all the bluster and bravado, in general lacks substance, is shown to be inconsistent when he tries to talk specifics, is dorky looking, and just generally ineffective. Palin is more presentable and scores more points on specifics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 I actually thought Palin did a better job against Biden than Ryan. Ryan, for all the bluster and bravado, in general lacks substance, is shown to be inconsistent when he tries to talk specifics, is dorky looking, and just generally ineffective. Palin is more presentable and scores more points on specifics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89FbCPzAsRA Ryan was just the male version of Palin tonight. Both pretty, both totally scripted, both more successful than anticipated -- Palin just played better to you (and most men) because she's a MILF and men are easier to manipulate in that fashion. I bet Ryan played really well tonight to the females, you just saw through his talking points because he doesn't have hooters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Ryan was just the male version of Palin tonight. Both pretty, both totally scripted, both more successful than anticipated -- Palin just played better to you (and most men) because she's a MILF and men are easier to manipulate in that fashion. I bet Ryan played really well tonight to the females, you just saw through his talking points because he doesn't have hooters. No you're wrong, I never found her desirable in that regard. But she is more presentable in a natural, easy going way than Ryan. Ryan acts smug like he's the smartest guy in the room or something and rarely shows any real emotion or spontaneity. Contrast versus his hollow words and he really comes across as a shallow dork, yes even more so than Palin. Of even greater surprise given the reputations is that her arguments have greater substance than his. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Is this your first election? hehe...it's VP debate night and that's what they're covering (read: selling) LOL, I really don't care btw to argue about who "won the VP debate" b/c it really is like arguing who is better the Bills or the Dolphins...it just doesn't matter. So basically you disagree with me in one thread then respond to another and pretty much agree with what you had just disagreed with So... when do we go into Iran? I'm thinking right around December 21st, personally. We know how you think about that whole Mayan Crapocalypse thing, but is there any chance we could delay WWIII/Armageddon to the 22nd? My birthday is the 21st and I want to have a happy birthday. The 22nd, I'll be too hung over to notice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts