molson_golden2002 Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Just wondering what you all think? Well Jim, I think Bush is going to throw away the lives of a lot of good young men for no good reason
Tux of Borg Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Well Jim, I think Bush is going to throw away the lives of a lot of good young men for no good reason What are you feelings about Bush's strategy in Somalia?
molson_golden2002 Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 What are you feelings about Bush's strategy in Somalia? Honestly, I don't know anything about them. Haven't looked at it yet, been focusing on Iraq and Iran policy. Perhaps I'll read up on it and get back to you
RI Bills Fan Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Read this: US Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual and you'll understand why the Bush Plan is, at best, a lame political response to the election results. General Shinski was right. The occupation requires a minimum of 400,000 troops. But! he was fired for telling us the truth. I think the Generals who wrote that manual just might know a wee bit more than the politicians who hamstring them when they try to do their job.
MattyT Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 What are you feelings about Bush's strategy in Somalia? I was just shocked that Ethiopia had planes.
Tux of Borg Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 I was just shocked that Ethiopia had planes. I think their Air Force consists of ten Mig-21 and a few SU-27.
VABills Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Honestly, I don't know anything about them. Haven't looked at it yet, been focusing on Iraq and Iran policy. Perhaps I'll read up on it and get back to you Still waiting for CNN to tell you how you should feel? Of course the democrats haven't had time to focus on it, as that's two things to try to form and opinion on, and that is just at least one too many.
erynthered Posted January 10, 2007 Posted January 10, 2007 Still waiting for CNN to tell you how you should feel? Of course the democrats haven't had time to focus on it, as that's two things to try to form and opinion on, and that is just at least one too many. NICE ONE!
GiantsOfAlbany Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 General Shinski was right. The occupation requires a minimum of 400,000 troops. But! he was fired for telling us the truth. The real truth is that we're losing in Iraq because our leaders do not have the balls to turn the insurgents, et al, into ashes. Doesn't matter how many troops we have there.
PastaJoe Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 The real truth is that we're losing in Iraq because our leaders do not have the balls to turn the insurgents, et al, into ashes. Doesn't matter how many troops we have there. To do that they'd have to carpet bomb the whole country and wipe everyone out, because at this point they can't tell the difference between the insurgents, foreign fighters, sectarian civil war fighters, and civilians. Like a doctor saying the operation was a success but the patient died.
X. Benedict Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 The real truth is that we're losing in Iraq because our leaders do not have the balls to turn the insurgents, et al, into ashes. Doesn't matter how many troops we have there. That et al is one hellava catch-all.
molson_golden2002 Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Still waiting for CNN to tell you how you should feel? Of course the democrats haven't had time to focus on it, as that's two things to try to form and opinion on, and that is just at least one too many. Oh gees, yes, I again missed Blitz Wolfers opinion on this. I guess I'll just have to wait to be told what to think.
molson_golden2002 Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 The real truth is that we're losing in Iraq because our leaders do not have the balls to turn the insurgents, et al, into ashes. Doesn't matter how many troops we have there. Ah yes, the Nazi option. Isn't it nice to see what evil direction some people want to pull our country in? Besides, if we wiped out the Sunnis, the Shiite militias of al-Sadr would be very happy
GiantsOfAlbany Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Rules of engagement leave American soldiers gun-shy. It's a commom complaint we hear from them. Marine snipers wish to work alone but military brass say they must work in teams. When they work in teams they easily expose themselves to the enemy. Moreover, we can't tell the difference between the good guys and bad guys because we don't live among them. We need to surreptitiously infiltrate them and kill them one-by-one without making a sound. Not carpet bombing.
chicot Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Rules of engagement leave American soldiers gun-shy. It's a commom complaint we hear from them. Marine snipers wish to work alone but military brass say they must work in teams. When they work in teams they easily expose themselves to the enemy. Moreover, we can't tell the difference between the good guys and bad guys because we don't live among them. We need to surreptitiously infiltrate them and kill them one-by-one without making a sound. Not carpet bombing. "Gun-shy"?! Are you completely insane? Following a roadside bombing, common policy is for US soldiers to open fire in all directions, killing anyone in the immediate vicinity. If you'd ever talked to any Iraqis, they'd tell you exactly that. Even US commanders have admitted that heavy-handed actions in the early days of the occupation had a lot to do with the rise of the Sunni insurgency. And yet, for some reason, there are still people like you who believe the answer is more force
Recommended Posts