Reuben Gant Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 For anyone wanting to know the "end game" or exact exit strategy, have you ever played the game RISK? Try playing while spelling out your exact strategy to your opponents and see if you win. 371757[/snapback] Played a lot of risk. Although I hear what your saying, it is not a standing army that we are up against, and there are no enemy divisions to counter in the traditional sense. I don't need a military strategy outlined, I want to know the conditions for victory. In the game Risk that is very clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben Gant Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 I caught the "Iraqization" line too. Listen to Kennedy, Pelosi, Harkin and so on and you get the Democrats plan for the next 3 years. Iraq as Vietnam. 371715[/snapback] Didn't hear that but, Iraq ain't Vietnam. But I cringe when I think that Victory is determined by somebody else's willingness to "Stand Up" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Played a lot of risk. Although I hear what your saying, it is not a standing army that we are up against, and there are no enemy divisions to counter in the traditional sense. I don't need a military strategy outlined, I want to know the conditions for victory. In the game Risk that is very clear. 371818[/snapback] Same as in real life: WIN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 At least the libs here haven't used the latest dem parrot word: quagmire. The only quagmire is the one in the brains full of mush that the dems in congress have. Nancy "Runaway Bride" Pelosi actually used the word Iraqization today! 371612[/snapback] quag·mire ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kwgmr, kwg-) n. Land with a soft muddy surface. A difficult or precarious situation; a predicament. Are you saying that this isn't a difficult or precarious situation? That it isn't a predicament? Strange, I thought it was a difficult situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR. Pinhead. 370873[/snapback] We probably should have invaded Saudi Arabia, then. Confilict of interest? Where did most of the 9/11 hijackers come from? I'm sure there's a witty reply coming from somebody here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 I really liked the part where he tried to talk about "sacrifice" to an audience that's bitching about their favorite reality-TV shows being preempted by his speech. As a society, we're totally !@#$ed. 370715[/snapback] Naaa, let him wallow in his own regurgitated Kool-aid. Smells in here......... 370771[/snapback] ...but solutions are hard. It is much easier to just...Oooooh...shiney object. 370776[/snapback] But,but.....NOSEPICK! HALLIBURTON! FLIGHTSUIT! NO BLOOD FOR OIL! Ding!.... HotPocket® ready!!! 370814[/snapback] Why do we bother? It's like trying to have a conversation with a friggin' Furby. 370910[/snapback] Wow, that's all very interest...oooh, Survivor's on! 370915[/snapback] Guess that's enough to make the point... For all your talk about "elitist liberals", you freaks don't exactly come off as very compassionate or tolerant. HOTPOCKETS! AMERICA IS F*CKED! REALITY TV! UNPATRIOTIC! You're like a bad stereotype of a high school clique. What a bunch of hypocrites. BAAAAAAAAAA!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 We probably should have invaded Saudi Arabia, then. Confilict of interest? Where did most of the 9/11 hijackers come from? I'm sure there's a witty reply coming from somebody here. 372248[/snapback] They came from Saudi Arabia. Would you invade Los Angeles because some Crips did a drive by? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 They came from Saudi Arabia. Would you invade Los Angeles because some Crips did a drive by? 372260[/snapback] Would you invade San Diego because the Crips from LA did a drive by in NYC? YOU might not, but you would obviously support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Guess that's enough to make the point... You had a point? For all your talk about "elitist liberals", you freaks don't exactly come off as very compassionate or tolerant. 372258[/snapback] Compassionate or tolerant of what? Idiotic regurgitaion of soundbytes while at the same time showing a complete unwillingness to learn more about a situation than what you hear from MoveOn.org? Take Reuben Gant for example. Now there is a poster who intelligently posts with a differing POV from myself. Notice the discussions with said poster. We learn from each other. Then take a look at Buckey/Juliann/JeffGordon. Lack of intelligent posts received the same level of discourse in return. Now, are you going to provide something of substance or are you just here to complain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Then he should have added something to the thread instead of the same old drool, just like you? Buck up bud. Whats the plan Stan? In stead of whining about our comments to someone else, why dont you tell us your plan? Think out of the Tardbox now, go on, mmmmK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 You had a point? Compassionate or tolerant of what? Idiotic regurgitaion of soundbytes while at the same time showing a complete unwillingness to learn more about a situation than what you hear from MoveOn.org? Take Reuben Gant for example. Now there is a poster who intelligently posts with a differing POV from myself. Notice the discussions with said poster. We learn from each other. Then take a look at Buckey/Juliann/JeffGordon. Lack of intelligent posts received the same level of discourse in return. Now, are you going to provide something of substance or are you just here to complain? 372278[/snapback] What the difference between Buckey/Juliann/JeffGordon? Sounds pretty much like the same person to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 You had a point? Compassionate or tolerant of what? Idiotic regurgitaion of soundbytes while at the same time showing a complete unwillingness to learn more about a situation than what you hear from MoveOn.org? Take Reuben Gant for example. Now there is a poster who intelligently posts with a differing POV from myself. Notice the discussions with said poster. We learn from each other. Then take a look at Buckey/Juliann/JeffGordon. Lack of intelligent posts received the same level of discourse in return. Now, are you going to provide something of substance or are you just here to complain? 372278[/snapback] I pretty much just stop in once in a while now. I used to enjoy it here, but I think if you look at the general tone of the board, it's hard to deny the intolerance of any opinion that does not originate just south of the Bible Belt. I agree that some of you (including yourself) have solid takes sometimes and are sport some fairly intelligent discussions from time to time. You've made me think about certain issues for sure. But the balance is not there. In reality, you're exactly what you claim all of the liberals are...elitist, condescending and intolerant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 We probably should have invaded Saudi Arabia, then. Confilict of interest? Where did most of the 9/11 hijackers come from? I'm sure there's a witty reply coming from somebody here. 372248[/snapback] Again, global war on TERROR. the 9/11 hijackers werent the first or last TERRORISTS to come down the pike. Is this THAT hard for you to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 We probably should have invaded Saudi Arabia, then. Confilict of interest? Where did most of the 9/11 hijackers come from? I'm sure there's a witty reply coming from somebody here. 372248[/snapback] Here's your snappy. For all the complaints about the Iraq quagmire, care to imagine what a war against Saudi Arabia would look like? How come none of the Democrats are campaigning for an all out assault on Pakistan because OBL is hiding out there? Why didn't Kraft punch Putin for stealing his ring? It sure is easy taking potshots without understanding the total background and calculating the probable outcomes of military actions. Just remember, the talking points you keep parroting were made up by those whose primary goal is to defeat Bush and not to do what's best for the country. An important distinction, if you care to note (and a hint to Dems in the next election). If you don't believe it, then what was Congress' vote total on the move to go to war, the vote total to keep funding the war, the vote total on PATRIOT 1 & 2, etc.? What was the vote total in the last election? At the end of the day, you have a lot of tough sounding words. But when it comes time to enact those tough words into legislation, somehow Bush gets his way by more than the party line. Amazing, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Would you invade San Diego because the Crips from LA did a drive by in NYC? YOU might not, but you would obviously support it. 372268[/snapback] What makes you think I would support it? That's a crap thing to say. If you go back over the last three years, I think I have contributed quite a bit of information including my thoughts and analysis re: National Security, war on terror, defense strategy, homeland Defense. Question some of those who don't act like moveon.org mouthpieces, but do have an opposing view as to whether I have ever regurgitated a soundbite or failed to present an objective analysis of those issues? I can't explain the intricacies of national security policy and overall strategies to effect them in a three sentence soundbite. I have on several occasions posted links to the relevant documents that shape those priorities and strategies. I've tried to explain many of them the best I could. Overall, I'd guess about 20 pages worth. When lawyers post things here (and other places) about the law, I pay attention and use it to try to learn. same with financial people, computer people, entertainment people, etc. There's a lot of knowledge here. I just happen to work at OSD level on the issues being discussed. I've tried to explain, many times why things sometimes are the way they appear to be- within limits, but in an objective (not party hack) manner. I can't help it if you never paid any attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Guess that's enough to make the point... For all your talk about "elitist liberals", you freaks don't exactly come off as very compassionate or tolerant. HOTPOCKETS! AMERICA IS F*CKED! REALITY TV! UNPATRIOTIC! You're like a bad stereotype of a high school clique. What a bunch of hypocrites. BAAAAAAAAAA!!! 372258[/snapback] I'm neither tolerant or compassionate, and I have just as much loathing for conservatives as liberals. The fact is, this country seems to consist of three hundred million ignorant boneheads and seven or eight people who can discuss this rationally...of which, you are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 National Strategy for Combating Terror National Security Strategy National Defense Strategy If you actually THINK about what you are reading, many of the explanations for Iraq, Afghanistan and a few other things are right here. There's nothing operational here, but there is also nothing going on operationally that is beyond the scope of the guidelines of the strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 National Strategy for Combating Terror National Security Strategy National Defense Strategy If you actually THINK about what you are reading, many of the explanations for Iraq, Afghanistan and a few other things are right here. There's nothing operational here, but there is also nothing going on operationally that is beyond the scope of the guidelines of the strategy. 372397[/snapback] Why read those, when the evening news summarizes it all so well for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Why read those, when the evening news summarizes it all so well for us? 372430[/snapback] As I said, as you read those - think about what is being said. I'm sure some people will mouth the words, and brush it all off as some government propoganda thing - but these things are written very carefully. They are MEANT for the rest of the world to read. That's why they aren't more specific and classified. It's pretty clear as to what we are up to, how we're going there, and what we desire for a result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Why read those, when the evening news summarizes it all so well for us? 372430[/snapback] Agreed. the General Electric Evening News, a subsidiary of Viacom, presented by Walt Disney Corporation summarizes it quite well and unbiased DING! gotta go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts