NY, LA, Miami and 'Dirty Bomb' Threat

[Alpha1]

Prostitution in Iraq ? Opium in Afgan. ? Strawman crap....

Off you meds? Prostitution and drugs in the Middle East and throughout the world is as old as time itself...

 

[dilloduck]

Prostitution in Iraq ? Opium in Afgan. ? Strawman crap....

Off you meds? Prostitution and drugs in the Middle East and throughout the world is as old as time itself...

You mean the US didn't import it? As much as MM would like to think Americas' presence hurt Iraq, I have this sneaky feeling that the Iraqis themselves aren't really doing a bang up job and having thugs from neighboring countries coming in to stir up the pot can't be helping things out either.

 

[maineman]

You mean the US didn't import it? As much as MM would like to think Americas' presence hurt Iraq, I have this sneaky feeling that the Iraqis themselves aren't really doing a bang up job and having thugs from neighboring countries coming in to stir up the pot can't be helping things out either.

I really am neutral about how our presence might or might not impact Iraqi citizens. Saddam was fairly brutal to them while preventing them from being too brutal to one another. We invaded...got rid of the guy who was keeping sunnis and shiites in line, keeping islamic extremists out, and keeping Iran somewhat in line, and now Iraqis are being brutal to one another.

My issue, as an american and a retired military officer - and taxpayer, is and has always been, what is the benefit to AMERICA of sending our troops into harm's way and what is the benefit to AMERICA of the concurrent use of our tax dollars. I have believed all along that this adventure in Iraq would be counterproductive, and thus not worthy of spilling American blood or spending American treasure.

We have changed the dynamic in Iraq.... and the resultant new dynamic is NOT in the best interests of the United States. period.

Additionally, I believe that our presence there NOW does not move Iraqis down any critical path to any place better. It would be great if we could do something positive, but we can't. Like there is little to nothing I could ever do to let my wife have an easier quicker less painful childbirth experience. All I could do is hold her hand. I think all America can do for Iraq is to get out of the way, to work the diplomatic angles hard to move all their neighbors into the process and have arabs and muslims solve their own problems....even if we helped create them. Having 150K troops..or 120K... or 190K for five more months/years/decades will only delay the inevitable...and in the process, continue to waste American lives and dollars on an effort that brings us LESS THAN ZERO benefit.

 

[dilloduck]

I really am neutral about how our presence might or might not impact Iraqi citizens. Saddam was fairly brutal to them while preventing them from being too brutal to one another. We invaded...got rid of the guy who was keeping sunnis and shiites in line, keeping islamic extremists out, and keeping Iran somewhat in line, and now Iraqis are being brutal to one another.

My issue, as an american and a retired military officer - and taxpayer, is and has always been, what is the benefit to AMERICA of sending our troops into harm's way and what is the benefit to AMERICA of the concurrent use of our tax dollars. I have believed all along that this adventure in Iraq would be counterproductive, and thus not worthy of spilling American blood or spending American treasure.

We have changed the dynamic in Iraq.... and the resultant new dynamic is NOT in the best interests of the United States. period.

Additionally, I believe that our presence there NOW does not move Iraqis down any critical path to any place better. It would be great if we could do something positive, but we can't. Like there is little to nothing I could ever do to let my wife have an easier quicker less painful childbirth experience. All I could do is hold her hand. I think all America can do for Iraq is to get out of the way, to work the diplomatic angles hard to move all their neighbors into the process and have arabs and muslims solve their own problems....even if we helped create them. Having 150K troops..or 120K... or 190K for five more months/years/decades will only delay the inevitable...and in the process, continue to waste American lives and dollars on an effort that brings us LESS THAN ZERO benefit.

I think

LESS THAN ZERO benefit

is a bit harsh and short sighted however let's just go with it for the sake of argument. Is you point that there are no possible negative consequences for America if we retreat ?

 

[maineman]

I think is a bit harsh and short sighted however let's just go with it for the sake of argument. Is you point that there are no possible negative consequences for America if we retreat ?

not my point at all.

I firmly believe that the NET benefit of all the consequences of our DEPARTURE (retreat is really an inappropriate word...this is, after all, THEIR fucking country) will be positive.

 

[dilloduck]

not my point at all.

I firmly believe that the NET benefit of all the consequences of our DEPARTURE (retreat is really an inappropriate word...this is, after all, THEIR fucking country) will be positive.

Retreat is a perfectly appropriate word. It doesn't matter whose country it is.

When you say "net" i am assuming that you are weighing the positives and negatives. What negatives do you see in leaving Iraq to it's own devices ?

 

[maineman]

Retreat is a perfectly appropriate word. It doesn't matter whose country it is.

When you say "net" i am assuming that you are weighing the positives and negatives. What negatives do you see in leaving Iraq to it's own devices ?

I disagree about "retreat". retreat means, "the forced withdrawal of an army or an armed force before an enemy, or the withdrawing of a naval force from action."

We would leave because we thought it was in our best interest, not because any enemy "forced" us to.

so...as I said...your use of "retreat" is inflammatory and inappropriate.

and yes...that IS what "net" means in that context.

What POSSIBLE negatives do I see to America of departing Iraq and letting them solve their own problems in concert with their neighbors? Not too many. I suppose that one of the negatives might be the political wrangling over how to proceed and how to reallocate our resources might further divide our nation and still not move us down any more constructive path.

 

[dilloduck]

I disagree about "retreat". retreat means, "the forced withdrawal of an army or an armed force before an enemy, or the withdrawing of a naval force from action."

We would leave because we thought it was in our best interest, not because any enemy "forced" us to.

so...as I said...your use of "retreat" is inflammatory and inappropriate.

and yes...that IS what "net" means in that context.

What POSSIBLE negatives do I see to America of departing Iraq and letting them solve their own problems in concert with their neighbors? Not too many. I suppose that one of the negatives might be the political wrangling over how to proceed and how to reallocate our resources might further divide our nation and still not move us down any more constructive path.

Surprising as it may be to you, there are several definitions of retreat (yours being but one) so I still think the word is quite appropriate. Especially because it's the word that our enemies will most likely use to debase our military efforts and use for recruiting.

As for possible negatives, I noticed you don't even include troop morale, possible genocide, propaganda disaster and loss of strategic territory.

 

[maineman]

Surprising as it may be to you, there are several definitions of retreat (yours being but one) so I still think the word is quite appropriate. Especially because it's the word that our enemies will most likely use to debase our military efforts and use for recruiting.

As for possible negatives, I noticed you don't even include troop morale, possible genocide, propaganda disaster and loss of strategic territory.

the definition I used is the one with the clearest military connotation and the one you intended to use. Or were you using retreat to refer to "a place of refuge, seclusion, or privacy, or an asylum, as for the insane"?

Using retreat in the military context is inappropriate and inflammatory, but I get your point...being inappropriate and inflammatory is sort of your calling card, isn't it?

I do not think that our troop morale would suffer from getting to come home and spend time with their families...and not having to do quick turnaround tours in the same war zone over and over again.

Possible genocide? Are you suggesting that there will be genocide of Americans if we leave? If such were the case, I would think that would be a negative consequence for America.... but I don't think you meant that, and your question was what the negative consequences to America would be. Iraqi sunnis killing Iraqi shiites and vice versa, as distasteful as that may be, is not a negative consequence to America.

Propaganda disaster? The Iraq war itself is a propaganda disaster. On one hand, the arab extremists will spin anything we ever do in a negative light to whip up the faithful so no matter what we do we lose that propaganda war. We will never win the hearts and minds of Al Qaeda. On the other hand, I guarantee that if we depart and concurrently work our asses off to help find a diplomatic solution through unending constructive respectful dialog with all of Iraq's neighbors, we will be seen in a much more positive light by the vast majority of the arab world in particular, and the world at large, generally.

Loss of strategic territory? It really is all about the oil for you guys, isn't it? Why else would departing a country we invaded, conquered and occupied without invitation and turning that country over to its own government be construed as a "loss of strategic territory"?

what else you got?

 

[dilloduck]

the definition I used is the one with the clearest military connotation and the one you intended to use. Or were you using retreat to refer to "a place of refuge, seclusion, or privacy, or an asylum, as for the insane"?

Using retreat in the military context is inappropriate and inflammatory, but I get your point...being inappropriate and inflammatory is sort of your calling card, isn't it?

I do not think that our troop morale would suffer from getting to come home and spend time with their families...and not having to do quick turnaround tours in the same war zone over and over again.

Possible genocide? Are you suggesting that there will be genocide of Americans if we leave? If such were the case, I would think that would be a negative consequence for America.... but I don't think you meant that, and your question was what the negative consequences to America would be. Iraqi sunnis killing Iraqi shiites and vice versa, as distasteful as that may be, is not a negative consequence to America.

Propaganda disaster? The Iraq war itself is a propaganda disaster. On one hand, the arab extremists will spin anything we ever do in a negative light to whip up the faithful so no matter what we do we lose that propaganda war. We will never win the hearts and minds of Al Qaeda. On the other hand, I guarantee that if we depart and concurrently work our asses off to help find a diplomatic solution through unending constructive respectful dialog with all of Iraq's neighbors, we will be seen in a much more positive light by the vast majority of the arab world in particular, and the world at large, generally.

Loss of strategic territory? It really is all about the oil for you guys, isn't it? Why else would departing a country we invaded, conquered and occupied without invitation and turning that country over to its own government be construed as a "loss of strategic territory"?

what else you got?

Lots

re·treat (rĭ-trēt')
n.

The act or process of withdrawing, especially from something hazardous, formidable, or unpleasant.

http://www.answers.com/topic/retreat?cat=technology

I don't have a "calling card" however it's fun to play around with pompous asses who are sure they have all the answers and there can be no other possible explanation except for theirs.

You don't feel as if some returning troops would feel a huge sense of worthlessness, wasted efforts and sacrifices gone for naught ? They are trained to succeed.

Shiite, Kurdish or Sunni -ANY genocide following a US retreat will be layed DIRECTLY at the feet of America. Every other disaster in the world is. You're insane if you don't think that would have a negative effect on America and troops who had been over their working directly with them and in many cases protecting them.

Our media does a better job of using the Iraq war as anti-Bush propaganda than the Arabs do---who are you kidding? If we retreat they will celebrate it as a liberal victory. Why is a retreat necessary before we engage in any diplomatic efforts?

Oil--yes-right now we need oil. You use it everyday. Confess--it's OK. It's vital that we have it. We are also looking right up Iran and Syrias' ass should they decide to try anything crazy.

 

[maineman]

re·treat (rĭ-trēt')
n.

The act or process of withdrawing, especially from something hazardous, formidable, or unpleasant.

the word is used in a military context.... therefore, other definitions are less appropriate.... as I demonstrated

I don't have a "calling card" however it's fun to play around with pompous asses who are sure they have all the answers and there can be no other possible explanation except for theirs.

I am perfectly willing to admit that I do not have all the answers, and I am hardly "pompous". I disagree with your perception of our actions in Iraq and the consequences thereof....and I really HATE the use of the word "retreat" when that is not what I would ever suggest we do.... militarily.

You don't feel as if some returning troops would feel a huge sense of worthlessness, wasted efforts and sacrifices gone for naught ? They are trained to succeed.

have you ever been a "troop"? yes or no?

I think that right now, the US Army has the highest suicide rate in its history... I think that it is profoundly stressful to keep being sent back to the same war zone to do the same mission in the same towns against the same "enemy" time after time after time.

I can tell you from experience that military personnel are trained to do their jobs as well as they can for as long as they are told to do so. Real "troops" know that they were sent INTO Iraq by politicians and they will be pulled OUT of Iraq by politicians. In between those two events they bust ass.

Shiite, Kurdish or Sunni -ANY genocide following a US retreat will be layed DIRECTLY at the feet of America. Every other disaster in the world is. You're insane if you don't think that would have a negative effect on America and troops who had been over their working directly with them and in many cases protecting them.

we invade, conquer, occupy, find the ex-tyrant, put him on trial, execute him, hold their hands while they vote not once not twice but three times...they form their own government, they write their own constitution....Do we stay until they prove that their social security system does indeed protect their citizenry from the cradle to the grave? We will HAVE to leave sometime (unless it really is all about the oil, of course) and when we do, Iraqis will increase the intensity of their conflict against one another. Are you really suggesting that we stay there forever to avoid the shame of having left and our departure precipitating genocide?

Our media does a better job of using the Iraq war as anti-Bush propaganda than the Arabs do---who are you kidding? If we retreat they will celebrate it as a liberal victory. Why is a retreat necessary before we engage in any diplomatic efforts?
if you think that Al Qaeda recruiters use western media coverage as a recruiting tool, you are truly and hopelessly stupid. period.

Oil--yes-right now we need oil. You use it everyday. Confess--it's OK. It's vital that we have it. We are also looking right up Iran and Syrias' ass should they decide to try anything crazy.

so you admit that all this "multicultural Jeffersonian democracy blossoming on the shores of the Euphrates", all this, "we were only trying to prevent Saddam's "nukes" from being transferred to Al Qaeda", all this "we are only trying to depose the butcher of Baghdad and his lecherous sons and their rape rooms" crap was just that? that it really WAS all about oil all along? Such an admission is simultaneously refreshingly honest and profoundly nauseating.

 

[dilloduck]

re·treat (rĭ-trēt')
n.

The act or process of withdrawing, especially from something hazardous, formidable, or unpleasant.

the word is used in a military context.... therefore, other definitions are less appropriate.... as I demonstrated

I don't have a "calling card" however it's fun to play around with pompous asses who are sure they have all the answers and there can be no other possible explanation except for theirs.

I am perfectly willing to admit that I do not have all the answers, and I am hardly "pompous". I disagree with your perception of our actions in Iraq and the consequences thereof....and I really HATE the use of the word "retreat" when that is not what I would ever suggest we do.... militarily.

You don't feel as if some returning troops would feel a huge sense of worthlessness, wasted efforts and sacrifices gone for naught ? They are trained to succeed.

have you ever been a "troop"? yes or no?

I think that right now, the US Army has the highest suicide rate in its history... I think that it is profoundly stressful to keep being sent back to the same war zone to do the same mission in the same towns against the same "enemy" time after time after time.

I can tell you from experience that military personnel are trained to do their jobs as well as they can for as long as they are told to do so. Real "troops" know that they were sent INTO Iraq by politicians and they will be pulled OUT of Iraq by politicians. In between those two events they bust ass.

Shiite, Kurdish or Sunni -ANY genocide following a US retreat will be layed DIRECTLY at the feet of America. Every other disaster in the world is. You're insane if you don't think that would have a negative effect on America and troops who had been over their working directly with them and in many cases protecting them.

we invade, conquer, occupy, find the ex-tyrant, put him on trial, execute him, hold their hands while they vote not once not twice but three times...they form their own government, they write their own constitution....Do we stay until they prove that their social security system does indeed protect their citizenry from the cradle to the grave? We will HAVE to leave sometime (unless it really is all about the oil, of course) and when we do, Iraqis will increase the intensity of their conflict against one another. Are you really suggesting that we stay there forever to avoid the shame of having left and our departure precipitating genocide?

Our media does a better job of using the Iraq war as anti-Bush propaganda than the Arabs do---who are you kidding? If we retreat they will celebrate it as a liberal victory. Why is a retreat necessary before we engage in any diplomatic efforts?
if you think that Al Qaeda recruiters use western media coverage as a recruiting tool, you are truly and hopelessly stupid. period.

Oil--yes-right now we need oil. You use it everyday. Confess--it's OK. It's vital that we have it. We are also looking right up Iran and Syrias' ass should they decide to try anything crazy.

so you admit that all this "multicultural Jeffersonian democracy blossoming on the shores of the Euphrates", all this, "we were only trying to prevent Saddam's "nukes" from being transferred to Al Qaeda", all this "we are only trying to depose the butcher of Baghdad and his lecherous sons and their rape rooms" crap was just that? that it really WAS all about oil all along? Such an admission is simultaneously refreshingly honest and profoundly nauseating.

I have said before and will say it again--I NEVER thought this war was all about WMDs and I NEVER expected Iraq to look like America. I was FULLY aware of our dependence on oil and know where it comes from.
I read bin ladens fatwah and saw the terrorist attacks on Americans and our allies. 9/11 was the last straw.
The WOT is not based on borders or state sovereignty. It's against a tactic used by those in a minority to invoke fear to obtain what they want. If countries in the mideast choose to tolerate and finance this tactic and endorse thier goals, they deserve to have this insanity happening on their doorsteps. THEY can be the first hand witnesses to the consequences of terrorism. THEY can watch their own people being murdered while they stand on a street corner. THEY can feel the pain of a religious war between themselves.
I don't CARE how we got into Iraq but I know damn well our enemies are there. Pretending it is Iraqs problem now is bullshit and no matter what you want to call it, running away from our enemies is retreating. I saw us retreat from Viet Nam. I know how many people were killed because we left.
But this ISN'T Viet Nam. The Vietnamese were content with the outcome. They got what they wanted. Al Quaeda will not be and neither will Iran.

 

[Alpha1]

re·treat (rĭ-trēt')
n.

The act or process of withdrawing, especially from something hazardous, formidable, or unpleasant.

the word is used in a military context.... therefore, other definitions are less appropriate.... as I demonstrated

I don't have a "calling card" however it's fun to play around with pompous asses who are sure they have all the answers and there can be no other possible explanation except for theirs.

I am perfectly willing to admit that I do not have all the answers, and I am hardly "pompous". I disagree with your perception of our actions in Iraq and the consequences thereof....and I really HATE the use of the word "retreat" when that is not what I would ever suggest we do.... militarily.

As I hate the term, agreed...but..to leave the field of battle, while your political leaders spout publicly, the war is lost...is by definition retreat....

You don't feel as if some returning troops would feel a huge sense of worthlessness, wasted efforts and sacrifices gone for naught ? They are trained to succeed.

have you ever been a "troop"? yes or no?

Quite irrelevant..but being in the USN in Gitmo, in the 60's...meant I was issued my 'greens' and helmet, combat boots, a .45, and M-1, trained to use a BAR and .30 Cal. machine gun, and stood watch with loaded weapons...as a 'snipe' officer, were you a "troop"

I think that right now, the US Army has the highest suicide rate in its history... I think that it is profoundly stressful to keep being sent back to the same war zone to do the same mission in the same towns against the same "enemy" time after time after time.

I can tell you from experience that military personnel are trained to do their jobs as well as they can for as long as they are told to do so. Real "troops" know that they were sent INTO Iraq by politicians and they will be pulled OUT of Iraq by politicians. In between those two events they bust ass.

Shiite, Kurdish or Sunni -ANY genocide following a US retreat will be layed DIRECTLY at the feet of America. Every other disaster in the world is. You're insane if you don't think that would have a negative effect on America and troops who had been over their working directly with them and in many cases protecting them.

we invade, conquer, occupy, find the ex-tyrant, put him on trial, execute him, hold their hands while they vote not once not twice but three times...they form their own government, they write their own constitution....Do we stay until they prove that their social security system does indeed protect their citizenry from the cradle to the grave? We will HAVE to leave sometime (unless it really is all about the oil, of course) and when we do, Iraqis will increase the intensity of their conflict against one another. Are you really suggesting that we stay there forever to avoid the shame of having left and our departure precipitating genocide?

Our media does a better job of using the Iraq war as anti-Bush propaganda than the Arabs do---who are you kidding? If we retreat they will celebrate it as a liberal victory. Why is a retreat necessary before we engage in any diplomatic efforts?
if you think that Al Qaeda recruiters use western media coverage as a recruiting tool, you are truly and hopelessly stupid. period.

And I'd say, you are naive to believe these bozos aresn't sophisticated enough to use our own media and the internet to further their cause...I won't use the label 'stupid'...

Oil--yes-right now we need oil. You use it everyday. Confess--it's OK. It's vital that we have it. We are also looking right up Iran and Syrias' ass should they decide to try anything crazy.

so you admit that all this "multicultural Jeffersonian democracy blossoming on the shores of the Euphrates", all this, "we were only trying to prevent Saddam's "nukes" from being transferred to Al Qaeda", all this "we are only trying to depose the butcher of Baghdad and his lecherous sons and their rape rooms" crap was just that? that it really WAS all about oil all along? Such an admission is simultaneously refreshingly honest and profoundly nauseating.

If it was only about oil, gas would be .50 cents a gal. in Maine...

 

[Ruby]

If it was only about oil, gas would be .50 cents a gal. in Maine...

No it wouldnt. Its not for oil in the sense that we want to provide it to US citizens cheaper. Its for oil that helps oil companies profit and gives the US POWER over those who need and want the oil as well.

It is about more as well, there is much profit in war, occupation and rebuilding.

 

[maineman]

I read bin ladens fatwah and saw the terrorist attacks on Americans and our allies. 9/11 was the last straw.
The WOT is not based on borders or state sovereignty. It's against a tactic used by those in a minority to invoke fear to obtain what they want. If countries in the mideast choose to tolerate and finance this tactic and endorse thier goals, they deserve to have this insanity happening on their doorsteps. THEY can be the first hand witnesses to the consequences of terrorism. THEY can watch their own people being murdered while they stand on a street corner. THEY can feel the pain of a religious war between themselves.
I don't CARE how we got into Iraq but I know damn well our enemies are there. Pretending it is Iraqs problem now is bullshit and no matter what you want to call it, running away from our enemies is retreating. I saw us retreat from Viet Nam. I know how many people were killed because we left.
But this ISN'T Viet Nam. The Vietnamese were content with the outcome. They got what they wanted. Al Quaeda will not be and neither will Iran.

a few points:

1. it is the people who do not understand the fundamental difference between arab nationalism and islamic extremism that got us into this stupid war. Iraq was an enemy of Al Qaeda as much as we were. Saddam was doing a great job at keeping the lid on islamic extremism within his borders. Saddam supplied money to the families of arab nationalist suicide bombers. There are not the same as islamic extremists. period. There are groups who use terror all over the globe and we need to concentrate on those that seek to do US harm and put the others on a "C" list somewhere. Or do you suggest we start a new front in Northern Ireland to go after those pesky catholics? And do you also suggest we apply a little shock and awe on South Boston because the Irish-Americans there provide funding to the IRA? Saddam supporting palestinian nationalism is IRRELEVANT!

2. I agree that the countries of the middle east need to play a lead role in this process. I believe I have said that all along.

3. I don't call it retreat because we are not running away from anyone. We are realizing that the enemy has a small contingent keeping a large force of ours occupied. We need to redirect our assets and attack the enemy, not sit static and be attacked by his small contingent.

an analogy:

A cavalry troop in the old west was out looking for a renegade indian tribe and as they were searching, they mistakenly moved into a box canyon only to find a small band of the tribe they were seeking was pinning them down from positions at the top of the canyon while the rest of the tribe escaped. If the cavalry commander mounted up his troops and charged out of the canyon in an effort to outflank the small band and gain a strategic advantage on his primary target - the larger renegade tribe, do you think his superior officers would categorize that tactical maneuver as a cowardly "retreat"? Do you think his superiors would castigate him for maneuvering his forces from a position of relative tactical disadvantage to a position of relative tactical advantage? Do you think that his troops would be "demoralized" and would wish that their commander had let them stay there and try to pick off the members of the small band of the tribe from their tactically disadvantageous positions in the bottom of the box canyon even though they were suffering high casualties? Do you think that the troops would think that such a tactical maneuver was an admission of failure? Or do you think they would recognize that their commander had wisely readjusted his tactical plan when he realized that he was in danger of being held down by a small force while the real enemy escaped?

Leaving the box canyon to go after the renegade tribe is not a retreat. Leaving Iraq to go after Islamic extremists and let Iraqi nationalists work out their own differences is not a retreat either. But go ahead...you keep spewing that lie and calling it retreat. It is obvious that you have no intention of stopping the inflammatory and intentionally partisan misuse of that word.

4. And what exactly do you expect us to accomplish in Iraq that will not crumble away into sectarian strife the moment we leave, no matter when that is?

 

[maineman]

comments:

Quite irrelevant..but being in the USN in Gitmo, in the 60's...meant I was issued my 'greens' and helmet, combat boots, a .45, and M-1, trained to use a BAR and .30 Cal. machine gun, and stood watch with loaded weapons...as a 'snipe' officer, were you a "troop"

And I'd say, you are naive to believe these bozos aresn't sophisticated enough to use our own media and the internet to further their cause...I won't use the label 'stupid'...

If it was only about oil, gas would be .50 cents a gal. in Maine...

1. you were a "troop". I was a "troop". And I was more than a snipe, I was an ASW officer, a weapons officer, an operations officer, and a maintenance manager at sea, and a UN crisis mediator and shore station commanding officer when on dry land.... to name the highlights. I have no idea where else you served or if you were a two years and out shorttimer, but I can tell you that those of us who did it for a while were quite used to "hurry up and wait...no no...go here...do this do that....no...go somewhere else...do something else....." Our "job" was to succeed at doing what we were supposed to be doing for as long as the suits told us to do it. then we went somewhere else and did something else when they changed their minds. That never "demoralized" me in the least.

2. I never said they didn't use the internet. I said that the content of the political debate in America is not an Al Qaeda recruiting tool. The Koran is. The crusades are. The age old inequities between Christianity and Islam is... the economic inequity of corrupt arab states and monarchies is. Our presence in Iraq is. And if we left Iraq and simultaneously stopped all of our efforts to track AQ or to strengthen our port and border defenses and completely abandoned all of our myriad efforts in the war on terror, that action might be useful as a recruiting tool...but leaving Iraq and taking the fight to the enemy elsewhere is not a very convincing recruiting tool for our enemies.

Do you honestly think a pitch like this would work?

"Look at how "cowardly" the enemy is: they leave Iraq and are killing us in much greater numbers in Afghanistan and Pakistan and they have made their ports and borders nearly impenetrable, and they have infiltrated our sleeper cells throughout north america and europe and they have conficated large buckets of cash in a variety of accounts that they have unearthed... and they have forced Israel to sit down at the negotiating table with the palestinians and they have gotten Israel to stop building settlements in the west bank, and they have forced the gulf state monarchies to improve thier civil rights records and to allow more and more democracy. We are obviously winning! Praise Allah!"


I don't see that as a retreat...and I certainly don't see that as anything that AQ would find effective in their efforts to entice disaffected arab youth to their cause, whereas, a pitch like this might be very effective:

"Look. We have 170 thousand Americans pinned down with a few thousand of our boys.... we are killing them every month and they stay there and let us kill them. They don't even seem to bother when we hold public graduation ceremonies for hundreds of suicide bombers in Afghanistan because they are irrationally obsessed with Iraq. They continue to put muslims down at every opportunity...they continue to support those filthy jews in whatever they wish to do to our people in palestine. Come...join us...come train to attack them in their home country - they are doing next to nothing to prevent our entry or the entry of terrible weapons into their porous port system.... we have them right where we want them now! Praise Allah!"

3. why would the oil companies want to give the consumer a good deal... and as has been mentioned, the oil issue was never about getting a good deal for average americans, but profits for oil companies and other bigtime contractors like haliburton. there is no denying that there are many folks raking in bucketloads of cash from our protracted conflict in Iraq... and there is also no doubt that they would just as soon see that gravy train keep right on running.

 

[dilloduck]

comments:



1. you were a "troop". I was a "troop". And I was more than a snipe, I was an ASW officer, a weapons officer, an operations officer, and a maintenance manager at sea, and a UN crisis mediator and shore station commanding officer when on dry land.... to name the highlights. I have no idea where else you served or if you were a two years and out shorttimer, but I can tell you that those of us who did it for a while were quite used to "hurry up and wait...no no...go here...do this do that....no...go somewhere else...do something else....." Our "job" was to succeed at doing what we were supposed to be doing for as long as the suits told us to do it. then we went somewhere else and did something else when they changed their minds. That never "demoralized" me in the least.

2. I never said they didn't use the internet. I said that the content of the political debate in America is not an Al Qaeda recruiting tool. The Koran is. The crusades are. The age old inequities between Christianity and Islam is... the economic inequity of corrupt arab states and monarchies is. Our presence in Iraq is. And if we left Iraq and simultaneously stopped all of our efforts to track AQ or to strengthen our port and border defenses and completely abandoned all of our myriad efforts in the war on terror, that action might be useful as a recruiting tool...but leaving Iraq and taking the fight to the enemy elsewhere is not a very convincing recruiting tool for our enemies.

Do you honestly think a pitch like this would work?

"Look at how "cowardly" the enemy is: they leave Iraq and are killing us in much greater numbers in Afghanistan and Pakistan and they have made their ports and borders nearly impenetrable, and they have infiltrated our sleeper cells throughout north america and europe and they have conficated large buckets of cash in a variety of accounts that they have unearthed... and they have forced Israel to sit down at the negotiating table with the palestinians and they have gotten Israel to stop building settlements in the west bank, and they have forced the gulf state monarchies to improve thier civil rights records and to allow more and more democracy. We are obviously winning! Praise Allah!"


I don't see that as a retreat...and I certainly don't see that as anything that AQ would find effective in their efforts to entice disaffected arab youth to their cause, whereas, a pitch like this might be very effective:

"Look. We have 170 thousand Americans pinned down with a few thousand of our boys.... we are killing them every month and they stay there and let us kill them. They don't even seem to bother when we hold public graduation ceremonies for hundreds of suicide bombers in Afghanistan because they are irrationally obsessed with Iraq. They continue to put muslims down at every opportunity...they continue to support those filthy jews in whatever they wish to do to our people in palestine. Come...join us...come train to attack them in their home country - they are doing next to nothing to prevent our entry or the entry of terrible weapons into their porous port system.... we have them right where we want them now! Praise Allah!"

3. why would the oil companies want to give the consumer a good deal... and as has been mentioned, the oil issue was never about getting a good deal for average americans, but profits for oil companies and other bigtime contractors like haliburton. there is no denying that there are many folks raking in bucketloads of cash from our protracted conflict in Iraq... and there is also no doubt that they would just as soon see that gravy train keep right on running.

"Look. We have 170 thousand Americans pinned down with a few thousand of our boys..

 

[maineman]

did you have anything of any intelligence to offer, or was the smilie the extent of it?

 

[dilloduck]

did you have anything of any intelligence to offer, or was the smilie the extent of it?

I was going to offer you some photos and captions of Russias' retreat for Afghanistan but I'm still laughing at our troops being "pinned down" by Al qaeda.

 

[maineman]

I was going to offer you some photos and captions of Russias' retreat for Afghanistan but I'm still laughing at our troops being "pinned down" by Al qaeda.

you clearly missed the fictional rhetorical context in which you found it.

why am I not surprised?