Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Play Dough loves your thinking Foxy, however, the rest of the thinking world has grown up. Even the syllogism of Aristotle barely made it throught the dark ages.(devasted by the enlightenment) ican not withstanding your appeal to "authority"

0 Replies

I guess it was the combination of the two words 'Bush' and 'aftermath' that led me to post the Iraq item here.

0 Replies

No worries, Blatham. We're pretty tolerant of even the most transparent efforts on our behalf Smile

What you need to keep in mind, however, is that 200,000 insurgents (I call them terrorists, but what the heck, we'll use the PC term) to the Marines (etal) equals 200,000 girlymen.

After all, these murdering cowards you call insurgents are the ones who hide behind white flags and dress up in women's clothing and, well, they're hardly a match for the dedicated, honorable, superbly disciplined and extraordinarily competent JARHEADS (etal) that will no doubt dispose of them in record time.

Of course, I realize if it was the Canadian Army (I think it's represented in that lone figure in your avatar), doing the dirty work, they would indeed have something to worry about.

I still think you should give your friends over in the other thread your good news. They'll no doubt be shouting with glee. They want us to lose, after all, and something tells me you do, too.

Merely my opinion, of course.

0 Replies

JW,

Let me get this straight:

1. The US military is the most effective force on the face of the planet... when it comes to conventional warfare.
2. The US forces will dispose of the insurgents in record time.
3. The number of insurgents is increasing despite the losses inflicted on them.

I fail to follow your victory scenario.

0 Replies

Regarding terminology, actually Shawani (director of Iraqi intelligence) refers to them as 'resistance' fighters.

Do I wish manly America to lose this war? It's an odd question and situation. Rather like having a doofus brother who says he's going to pick a fight with the out-of-towner, and you give all your arguments why that's a really doofus decision, and he does it anyway, and he gets a ****-kicking.

My avatar is not a representation of the Canadian Army. It's a representation of a traffic control officer.

Our army, like yours, finds it proper representation in a pile of mutilated American or Canadian body parts surmounted by a politician, arms raised, with an erection, and yelling "I've won!"

0 Replies

1. The US military is the most effective force on the face of the planet... when it comes to conventional warfare....or any kind of warfare.

2. The US forces will dispose of the insurgents in record time...compared to any other army on the planet.

3. The number of insurgents is increasing despite the losses inflicted on them...and it was predicted to be so in the runup to the elections.

I fail to follow your victory scenario.

(Yes, I know you do, but trust me on this one. We will prevail).

0 Replies

I find lots of evidence that attacks from insurgents are increased as the election date approaches. I can't find any data, other than supposition, that the insurgents themselves are increasing in numbers. How do you suppose one goes about counting insurgents? What criteria is used to establish the number of terrorists anywhere? Should we take the terrorists' word for how many of them there are? I seem to recall our own military exaggerating its own strength from time to time for the express purpose of intimidating the enemy. I could believe the enemy might do the same.

In the matter of this conflict, I think people of consicence have to decide between three points of view:

1. If the terrorists win, nowhere on earth will be safe from that point on.

2. If we simply stop hostilities, the terrorists will mostly stop hostilities, there will be less incentive to recruit terrorists, and therefore the world will be a safer place.

3. If we win, there will be far fewer terrorists or those who can be recruited to terrorism, and thus the world will be a safer place.

I guess where we are is on the point of view we are willing to stake our lives and fortunes on.

0 Replies

When you see someone wearing a bhurka and army boots....count em !

<They also like ski-masks>

0 Replies

Think of Iraq as building a YMCA in the middle of a bad neighborhood. Tough to gage exactly how much good it does, but good it does.

0 Replies

Think of Iraq as dropping cluster bombs in the middle of a bad neighborhood of men, women and children. Tough to know how much hate it engenders, but hate it engenders.

0 Replies

My glass is half full, thank you.

0 Replies

I think it so. The question is, what is it half-full of?

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

1. The US military is the most effective force on the face of the planet... when it comes to conventional warfare....or any kind of warfare.

2. The US forces will dispose of the insurgents in record time...compared to any other army on the planet.

3. The number of insurgents is increasing despite the losses inflicted on them...and it was predicted to be so in the runup to the elections.

I fail to follow your victory scenario.

(Yes, I know you do, but trust me on this one. We will prevail).

I'm sure we will... if we use your definition of "prevail." Not that you would deign to inform us what you believe would be necessary for the US to prevail.

I've asked for folks to tell me exactly what they mean by a "win" in Iraq, but only Asherman has taken a swing at it.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1093053#1093053

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

yeah really, wouldn't it be nice if we could all be just like Tom DeLay?

why ? ya wanna open a weasel farm, dys ?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

In the matter of this conflict, I think people of consicence have to decide between three points of view:

1. If the terrorists win, nowhere on earth will be safe from that point on.

2. If we simply stop hostilities, the terrorists will mostly stop hostilities, there will be less incentive to recruit terrorists, and therefore the world will be a safer place.

3. If we win, there will be far fewer terrorists or those who can be recruited to terrorism, and thus the world will be a safer place.

****, you must have a tough time chosing between 1) and 3), Fox!

0 Replies

That was very astute, nimh.

0 Replies

What constitutes a win? a loss? I believe we have already favorably altered the historical trajectory of Iraq and the countries of the former Ottoman Empire. Time will tell, but superficial thinking and analysis now will lead nowhere.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

JustWonders wrote:
1. The US military is the most effective force on the face of the planet... when it comes to conventional warfare....or any kind of warfare.

2. The US forces will dispose of the insurgents in record time...compared to any other army on the planet.

3. The number of insurgents is increasing despite the losses inflicted on them...and it was predicted to be so in the runup to the elections.

I fail to follow your victory scenario.

(Yes, I know you do, but trust me on this one. We will prevail).

I'm sure we will... if we use your definition of "prevail." Not that you would deign to inform us what you believe would be necessary for the US to prevail.

I've asked for folks to tell me exactly what they mean by a "win" in Iraq, but only Asherman has taken a swing at it.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1093053#1093053

A win in Iraq will be an independent government that is not hostile towards the United States or Israel.

0 Replies

OK. How about having a swing at the rest of the questions I posed?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

What constitutes a win? a loss? I believe we have already favorably altered the historical trajectory of Iraq and the countries of the former Ottoman Empire. Time will tell, but superficial thinking and analysis now will lead nowhere.

What might constitute a win now appears a rather different than what was proposed as a win earlier.

Standards have been lowered from:
1) floral greetings
2) the rest of the world will be proved wrong about...everything
3) lotso womd known to be beneath palm tree 177 delivered from evil
4) major combat operations done before you can say "President's Pecker"
5) minor casualty rate
6) freedom will march through the region as more and more Muslims draw huge "I (heart) America" on their rooftops
7) a few "Saddam loyalists" quickly mopped up
8) a few "hangers on" quickly mopped up
9) a "couple of hundred foreign terrorists" quickly mopped up
10) Iraqis will be in charge and running the show
11) it's getting more peaceful
12) boys'll be back home before you can say "****-shovel"
13) and frenchmen will kiss our asses and maybe take the stars and stripes as their flag too

down to:
1) somehow get out without destroying the Republican movement
2) somehow maintain control of oil reserves

and for the few who actually give a shitt:
3) avoid civil war and chaos in the wider region
4) reduce and end loss of American and Iraqi lives
5) try not to bring on a domestic financial crisis

0 Replies

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know