jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 An "I don't know" would have sufficed. But then, considering you took a general observation and made it personal, you probably are just a stupid idiot. 859582[/snapback] Probably. I believe the media, so that's a pretty good indication of my imbicility. Good thing we have people like you who can see through the lies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 I often wonder how the American public would have reacted if some of TODAY'S journalists were on the ground when Tokyo was firebombed or when Americans came ashore at Iwo. 859588[/snapback] You are projecting your anger. It's not the media's fault Iraq is the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 You are projecting your anger. It's not the media's fault Iraq is the way it is. 859604[/snapback] And you don't see the irony in this? It's not the media's fault that Iraq is the way it is...but your only source of information on how Iraq currently is, is the media. Thus creating an unassailable position of circular logic that ensures no one can have a reasonable discussion with you. And THAT'S why your original post is shallow and silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 And you don't see the irony in this? It's not the media's fault that Iraq is the way it is...but your only source of information on how Iraq currently is, is the media. Thus creating an unassailable position of circular logic that ensures no one can have a reasonable discussion with you. And THAT'S why your original post is shallow and silly. 859647[/snapback] Your premise is based on faulty logic and a lack of basic facts. The media is not the only place to get info about Iraq. Government agencies publish info also. Military officials discuss their thoughts based on first hand accounts and NGOs [non government organizations] publish many reports. Also, there is no single media. There are many media outlets tthat give different details and perspectives. Yet taken together all these different sources lead us to a single conclusion: Iraq is in choas. The attempt to blame the media, or to say that the majority of Americans don't have enough information to conclude this is really a run from reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Your premise is based on faulty logic and a lack of basic facts. The media is not the only place to get info about Iraq. Government agencies publish info also. Military officials discuss their thoughts based on first hand accounts and NGOs [non government organizations] publish many reports. Also, there is no single media. There are many media outlets tthat give different details and perspectives. Yet taken together all these different sources lead us to a single conclusion: Iraq is in choas. The attempt to blame the media, or to say that the majority of Americans don't have enough information to conclude this is really a run from reality. 859667[/snapback] So how many parties are fighting in Iraq? And who's supporting each one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 "nothing" A good way to describe your post 859568[/snapback] Just because you didn't understand my point does not mean that my post lacked one. You are pulling random numbers out of your ass, (the effects of 20,000 troops vs 1 million), and claiming that it is a solution for Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Your premise is based on faulty logic and a lack of basic facts. The media is not the only place to get info about Iraq. Government agencies publish info also. Military officials discuss their thoughts based on first hand accounts and NGOs [non government organizations] publish many reports. Also, there is no single media. There are many media outlets tthat give different details and perspectives. Yet taken together all these different sources lead us to a single conclusion: Iraq is in choas. The attempt to blame the media, or to say that the majority of Americans don't have enough information to conclude this is really a run from reality. 859667[/snapback] People get so defensive and take things personal... Just human nature in all. I don't think some people know the difference between the good, the VERY good things we are doing individually missionwise and the whole picture... Hence they treat it as a personal attack on the job they or we as Americans are doing or did over there... When you say that the big picture will never be as good as the individual good they are doing. And when many Americans take this view... The one's on the defensive try and find fault with how those Americans came to their conclusions... And the personal attacks then start to fly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I see. And how would you say the reporting is flawed? I see Iraq in choas. Is that wrong? Of course I'm just a stupid idiot who reads the main stream media, so that is understandable. 859565[/snapback] WTF is choas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 7, 2006 Author Share Posted December 7, 2006 Just because you didn't understand my point does not mean that my post lacked one.You are pulling random numbers out of your ass, (the effects of 20,000 troops vs 1 million), and claiming that it is a solution for Iraq. 859740[/snapback] Not radom at all. the 20k comes from McCain, as my original states. And the one million comes from Niall Ferguson, the neocon historian who has said 1 million would be necessary to quell Iraq. He says it here, as he has said it elsewhere: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jh.../ixopinion.html Glad to see you can write more than one sentence at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 I stand corrected. I hadn't actually seen anyone argue for a million troops before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Not radom at all. the 20k comes from McCain, as my original states. And the one million comes from Niall Ferguson, the neocon historian who has said 1 million would be necessary to quell Iraq. He says it here, as he has said it elsewhere: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jh.../ixopinion.html Glad to see you can write more than one sentence at a time. 859839[/snapback] Cool. Some Harvard historian with virtually no military background is now advocating something you can regurgitate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Not radom at all. the 20k comes from McCain, as my original states. And the one million comes from Niall Ferguson, the neocon historian who has said 1 million would be necessary to quell Iraq. He says it here, as he has said it elsewhere: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jh.../ixopinion.html Glad to see you can write more than one sentence at a time. 859839[/snapback] I believe this is called GIGO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 WTF is choas? 859786[/snapback] He probably means chaos: Journal August 3, 2004 Land of Contrasts … I went for a run this morning and it was really a beautiful morning. Sunrise was coming up in the east… not scorching hot like it can get over here. The base closes down one of the cross camp roads for exercise so I was not alone. Towards the end of the run, you could hear the day begin with the sound of diesel engines and trucks starting to move out. Really, rather a peaceful morning. In the shower I heard some guys talking about going back out on patrol. One said, “It's been 30 days since I've been out beyond the wire…” I was thinking to myself that I never have to go beyond the wire (outside the base) where the risk is exponential… Later in the A.M., we rounded on a 34-year-old who was struck by another IED (improvised explosive device) last night. He lost his right leg and his left leg is badly mangled (and will likely be lost as well). The legs were literally shredded by the blast. There is a feeling of frustration and helplessness to see a younger soldier with such a huge loss. To guard against the IEDs many humvees have been “up armored,” which basically involves bolting extra steel on to the doors of the vehicles. Other troops have placed their flak vests on the floor and outside their trucks. Despite the protection, it appears to me that the only way to guard against random IEDs is to stay within the wire… August 11, 2004 Midnight Madness… We live on an old Iraqi air base in one of the many three bedroom cookie cutter houses that make up our 4 x 6 block neighborhood. Our surgical team has been assigned three of these houses, with the doctors living in the middle of three. Unfortunately, the construction is shoddy and the plumbing has been abandoned. We have chased lizards and mice out, and exterminated a few cockroaches and scorpions as well. The electrical wiring is sketchy. I am told a year or so ago a soldier was electrocuted when he tried to shower in one of the houses… It was not surprising when our window air-conditioning unit blew out the socket yesterday, so it was hot and muggy. I had finally managed to get to sleep around 1 A.M. when one the enlisted guys came running and shouting into our house… “Johnson” and “Smith” (names changed) are fighting with their weapons locked and loaded… Turns out that next door one of the guys was playing his DVD player and laughing and was told to be quiet… rather than be quiet he got his M-16 and put a round in the chamber… there was a struggle between the two but no bullets were fired… the nurses and OR techs were able to separate them… Of course anytime a soldier turns a weapon on his fellow soldier it is a huge - problem not to mention that nobody felt comfortable going to sleep in the same house with these guys… Both soldiers were taken to the hospital for toxicology screens and combat stress psychiatric evaluations… Our commander spent all night in the hospital with these two guys …they are separated now and things are cooling down. It's not like we are in daily combat; but I have only been here a week and the heat, desert, and close living conditions have already become annoying… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 So how many parties are fighting in Iraq? And who's supporting each one? 859721[/snapback] Impossible to count. The place is anarchy. Sunnis vs. Shiites, Shiites vs. Shiites, Kurds vs. Sunnis, common criminals run amoke, throw in some foreign fights and who knows who is killing whom. We do know its a great big mess. I just think it's childish for McCain to suggest 20k more troops would make a difference at all. My guess is that he is setting himself up to grab the angry losers vote after we pull out of this mess. He could argue that he had a plan but the media and liberals--or this there a difference in the world of the angry losers?--brought on defeat, just like in Nam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Balls Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I've been watching some of the senate confirmation hearings for Gates and they seem strangely out of touch with reality. I could agree with sending more troops, but 20,000 won't make any different as far as I can see. If you sent in a million soldiers I think you might be able to cover the whole country and bring stability and close the border and all that. Of course that would mean a draft or getting other countries to send troops, so I don't think it will happen. The other option is getting out and that would be a mess. I bet a million people would starve to death if we left and the country completely broke down. So I guess I'm saying I, like President Bush or anyone else, have no solution to this problem. 858528[/snapback] What this does is effectively prove that John McCain has succesfully, after coming close for many years, lost his mind and killed whatever chances he might have had for '08. He's finally crossed over to the batty right wing neoconservative side about eight years too late with his steadfast statement that we must send in more soldiers. In the unlikely chance that McCain is our next president get ready for a draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Cool. Some Harvard historian with virtually no military background is now advocating something you can regurgitate. 859847[/snapback] You do not need to be an economist to know a dollar is a dollar, nor do you need to be a weatherman to know when it is raining. Same with Iraq. No need for military experience to see it is a failed military venture. BTW, I don't like Ferguson at all. He proved his imbilicity by supporting the Iraq invasion. Seems hard to fathom someone with intelligence and education doing something like that. Perhaps a mental defect on his part. I was merely using his number to show what people out there were talking about. And I stated it was outlandish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Despite the protection, it appears to me that the only way to guard against random IEDs is to stay within the wire… That about says it all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 You do not need to be an economist to know a dollar is a dollar, nor do you need to be a weatherman to know when it is raining. Gee, I wonder why I initially thought your take was simplistic and silly? Same with Iraq. No need for military experience to see it is a failed military venture. Horsehockey. It's not a failed military venture. The military part of it was quite successful. It's been the typical lesson in how little politicians can actually accomplish, despite what amounts to pretty much a blank check - take note of this, liberals. Iraq is a terrific example of why your idea of Motherment WILL NEVER WORK. BTW, I don't like Ferguson at all. He proved his imbilicity by supporting the Iraq invasion. Seems hard to fathom someone with intelligence and education doing something like that. Perhaps a mental defect on his part. I was merely using his number to show what people out there were talking about. And I stated it was outlandish. 860279[/snapback] He didn't use it as "his number" or as a solution. It was an example in comparison to a completely different type of conflict in virtually ever way. I wouldn't call anything else he has stated as hard to fathom, as academia has little practical world experience and prefers to overanalyze things using hindsight as their guide. The Iraq situation was doomed to failure for a variety of reasons. Most of which I doubt you or any of the other lefty parrots could come close to stating with anything other than blind luck. Of course, I pretty much called this from the initial mustering - to a "T". Anyone care to dispute that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Impossible to count. 860273[/snapback] Really? I've got two different books on my desk right now, both of which give a reasonably accurate outline of the different parties in conflict in Iraq, their methods (political or military...or both), their goals, and their backing. So is that "Impossible to count"? Or "Impossible for you to count"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmy_from_north_buffalo Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Gee, I wonder why I initially thought your take was simplistic and silly? Horsehockey. It's not a failed military venture. The military part of it was quite successful. It's been the typical lesson in how little politicians can actually accomplish, despite what amounts to pretty much a blank check - take note of this, liberals. Iraq is a terrific example of why your idea of Motherment WILL NEVER WORK. He didn't use it as "his number" or as a solution. It was an example in comparison to a completely different type of conflict in virtually ever way. I wouldn't call anything else he has stated as hard to fathom, as academia has little practical world experience and prefers to overanalyze things using hindsight as their guide. The Iraq situation was doomed to failure for a variety of reasons. Most of which I doubt you or any of the other lefty parrots could come close to stating with anything other than blind luck. Of course, I pretty much called this from the initial mustering - to a "T". Anyone care to dispute that? 860346[/snapback] What a perfect rant about nothing, concluding with a criticism of liberalism, of all things. I do agree this venture was doomed before it even started, that's why I always opposed it. And the reasons were not very coplicated as you seem to profess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts