Listening to your fellow chickenhawks Limbaugh and Hannity doesn't count as military service....it's just more delusion on your part.Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
Printable View
Listening to your fellow chickenhawks Limbaugh and Hannity doesn't count as military service....it's just more delusion on your part.Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
Which are your realities. So there...
All you have is a very poorly thought out hypothetical for a response????? LMAO………So, what you’re essentially saying is that – despite my giving you multiple opportunities to do so – you can’t even begin to support the following statement with any specifics:Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
That’s what I thought. More empty, unsupported, uneducated generalizations…Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
Furthermore, your irrelevant hypothetical fails, once again, to recognize, let alone effectively address or event refute the realities on the ground in Iraq:
1. -Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak, Air Force chief of staff, 1990-94:
We have a force in Iraq that's much too small to stabilize the situation. It's about half the size, or maybe even a third, of what we need.
2. -Former CENTCOM commander Gen. Anthony Zinni:
When I was commander of CENTCOM, we had a plan for an invasion of Iraq, and it had specific numbers in it. We wanted to go in there with 350,000 to 380,000 troops. You didn't need that many people to defeat the Republican Guard, but you needed them for the aftermath.
When I left in 2000, General Franks took over. Franks was my ground-component commander, so he was well aware of the plan. He had participated in it; those were the numbers he wanted. So what happened between him and Rumsfeld and why those numbers got altered, I don't know, because when we went in we used only 140,000 troops, even though General Eric Shinseki, the army commander, asked for the original number.
3. A panel of retired generals told a United States Senate committee today that sending 21,500 additional troops to Iraq will do little to solve the underlying political problems in the country. "Too little and too late," is the way Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former chief of the Central Command, described the effort to the Senate Committee.
4. -Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded the 1st US Army Division in Iraq:
I think the current administration repeatedly ignored sound military advice and counsel with respect to the war plans.
I suspect, going way back five years to the beginning of this whole war, there were ample times when people said to him, as General Shinseki did, "We need more." In the case of General Shinseki, he was retired early.
When decisions are made without taking into account sound military recommendations, sound military decision-making, sound planning, then we're bound to make mistakes.
5. -Maj. Gen. Charles Swannack, who commanded the 82nd Airborne in Iraq:
Well I don't agree with Secretary Rumsfeld's management of the war. Specifically, I feel he has micromanaged the generals who are leading our forces there to achieve our strategic objectives.
As previously noted, these comments represent only the tip of the iceberg so far as military critics of the Bush Administration’s Iraq policy are concerned.
One more thing regarding your ridiculous hypothetical. To the best of my knowledge FDR never saw his ratings drop below the low 50s (I believe they stayed around the 70s during the war period), whereas Bush’s approval ratings have reached lows that put him in the same disgraceful territory as this nation’s two other post-war failures: Carter and Nixon. FDR never faced such broad criticism from the military, when Bush does, for a reason: FDR committed the resources necessary to win that war, whereas Bush went out of his way to do the opposite in Iraq – and is still doing it (the current "troop surge" is far too small to be effective and is mostly cosmetic)?
-Quinn
That's your opinion.
Your admission of defeat is accepted. Still, let’s review the facts for shits and giggles:Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
1. You idiotically stated that the Iraq conflict is dragging on for the following reason: “. . . if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it wouldr be acomplished by now.”
Not surprisingly, when repeatedly challenged to do so, you couldn’t provide a single specific fact to support your asinine statement. Wow, there’s a shock.
2. When I asserted that the Iraq conflict has dragged on due to poor planning and implementation on the part of the Bush Administration – being sure to provide supporting evidence by citing just some of the overwhelming criticism coming from senior military sources, including those who served in Iraq – you couldn’t debate the facts so you put forth some poorly thought out and irrelevant hypothetical scenario.
Once again, your failure to support your point or debate anything of a factual, objectively real nature doesn’t come as any surprise.
3. After I destroyed your comically inept and irrelevant hypothetical scenario – in part by citing historical facts that render it irrelevant (approval ratings, etc.) – you responded with “That’s your opinion," failing to respond with anything of a factual or even hypothetical nature.
The funny things is that it is clearly you who have utterly failed to put forth anything other than your own uninformed, completely unsupported opinions. I, by contrast, have supported my statements with relevant facts, not fanciful and ill conceived hypothetical scenarios. Nice job, Patton. Maybe you should leave this to people who can actually support their statements. What a joke.............
-Quinn
Since I’m a committed Independent and moderate, this doesn’t necessarily apply to me, but I take issue with your hypocrisy none the less. If memory serves, Chef served on the flight deck of the USS Kitty Hawk, one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. What have you done? I served with the US Army and saw action during Operation Desert Storm. Once again, what have you done? Oh, that’s right, you’re a 19-year old kid who lives at home with his parents and has never done anything other than sit around whining on a TS Forum. What a sanctimonious dullard you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
-Always Out Front!!!
I didn't admit defeat. I just disagree with your views and as neither of us are employed by the DOD they are just viewpoints.
You don't need to verbally admit it. Your inability to support any of your ridiculous statements, which have been thoroughly refuted, says it for you. See below:Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
1. You idiotically stated that the Iraq conflict is dragging on for the following reason: “. . . if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it wouldr be acomplished by now.”
Not surprisingly, when repeatedly challenged to do so, you couldn’t provide a single specific fact to support your asinine statement. Wow, there’s a shock.
2. When I asserted that the Iraq conflict has dragged on due to poor planning and implementation on the part of the Bush Administration – being sure to provide supporting evidence by citing just some of the overwhelming criticism coming from senior military sources, including those who served in Iraq – you couldn’t debate the facts so you put forth some poorly thought out and irrelevant hypothetical scenario.
Once again, your failure to support your point or debate anything of a factual, objectively real nature doesn’t come as any surprise.
3. After I destroyed your comically inept and irrelevant hypothetical scenario – in part by citing historical facts that render it irrelevant (approval ratings, etc.) – you responded with “That’s your opinion," failing to respond with anything of a factual or even hypothetical nature.
The funny things is that it is clearly you who have utterly failed to put forth anything other than your own uninformed, completely unsupported opinions. I, by contrast, have supported my statements with relevant facts, not fanciful and ill conceived hypothetical scenarios. Nice job, Patton. Maybe you should leave this to people who can actually support their statements. What a joke.............
-Quinn
P.S. I served in the US Army so I did, in fact, work for the DOD. I also hold an MA in International Relations (with a specialty in Foreign Policy Analysis and Security Studies, and a subspecialty International Political Economy). Translation, I know what the fuck I'm talking about; you don't.....
My only viewpoint was that I supported my countries policies. Seems to me that you have some deep seated anger issues.
LMAO...... Is it because I'm dealing with you in precisely the same disrespectful manner you consistently show toward the liberals on this forum (I can provide plenty of examples where you call them cowards and much more)? Maybe it's because I've singularly smashed each of your moronic and uninformed assertions? I'll tell you what, junior, you tell yourself whatever self-deluded nonsense you have to. You record of intellectual incompetence clearly stands for all to see:Quote:
Originally Posted by guyone
1. You idiotically stated that the Iraq conflict is dragging on for the following reason: “. . . if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it wouldr be acomplished by now.”
Not surprisingly, when repeatedly challenged to do so, you couldn’t provide a single specific fact to support your asinine statement. Wow, there’s a shock.
2. When I asserted that the Iraq conflict has dragged on due to poor planning and implementation on the part of the Bush Administration – being sure to provide supporting evidence by citing just some of the overwhelming criticism coming from senior military sources, including those who served in Iraq – you couldn’t debate the facts so you put forth some poorly thought out and irrelevant hypothetical scenario.
Once again, your failure to support your point or debate anything of a factual, objectively real nature doesn’t come as any surprise.
3. After I destroyed your comically inept and irrelevant hypothetical scenario – in part by citing historical facts that render it irrelevant (approval ratings, etc.) – you responded with “That’s your opinion," failing to respond with anything of a factual or even hypothetical nature.
The funny things is that it is clearly you who have utterly failed to put forth anything other than your own uninformed, completely unsupported opinions. I, by contrast, have supported my statements with relevant facts, not fanciful and ill conceived hypothetical scenarios. Nice job, Patton. Maybe you should leave this to people who can actually support their statements. What a joke.............
-Quinn