Hey Hapaboi . . .

Discussion in 'Politics' started by waggie945, Apr 12, 2004.

  1. BSAM


    Understood. You make good points here in your post. Oh, no doubt, Little George and his crew are in deep doodoo over Iraq. And yeah.....telling me I've got to stay on in Iraq after I've done my time there and in expectation of going home SUCKS to say the least.

    However, I'm pro U.S. And I try to consider the bigger picture on any particular subject. There's way too much U.S. bashing that goes on here on ET. So, there should be others to help sometimes put a different perspective onto the various subjects we discuss here.

    As I've stated elsewhere on our boards here, this Ronald Reagan Republican will be voting for Kerry come November. And not just for this Iraq fiasco. Please.....Don't get me started on Little George Bush.

    Otherwise, and not to belabor the subject, but I still maintain that without the troops who you say are staying; from what I understand you to be saying, the general would be left with 120,000 people. Your scorching in your first post on page two ("I guess I have found out that.....") with all the insulting vulgarities thrown in, prompted me to respond. Anyways.....yeah, wherever the numbers of troops are coming from is irrelevant except for those guys and gals who thought they were going to get to go home.

    Still, good, intelligent debate is always stimulating, regardless of who is exactly in the right or maybe slightly in the wrong or not fully aware.


    #11     Apr 13, 2004
  2. I don't know why you've got your panties all ruffled with BSAM and myself over this. The only point I've ever made to you about troop strength is that I leave that up to the soldiers on the ground, those doing the fighting, to evaluate whether or not they need more men or materiel. Shouldn't they know best, not those of us arguing on internet chat boards?

    As for the troops having to stay longer, yes that sucks. Guess what? They're doing what they're paid to do. As American soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen and women have done over the centuries, they suck it up and forge ahead with their missions. I doubt for a minute that it was a huge surprise to the majority of them, and even if it was, they'll continue to do their jobs to the best of their ability.

    I served in the Army. I know what it's like to be somewhere you don't want to be and doing things that you disagree with, especially when told by idiots in the chain of command. But you just go on and do your job.

    I disagree with a lot of the tactical decisions that are being made over there, i.e. this truce bullshit, but I'm not there doing the fighting - and neither are you.

    Anyways, you started this thread calling me out by name. I have responded. If you want to keep using the f-word that's your prerogative. If you want to try and keep things civil, a-okay by me. I'll follow your lead as to the tone of our future posts.

    It's up to you.
    #12     Apr 13, 2004
  3. You still miss the point.

    On a smaller scale, the deteriorating morale is indeed a huge concern. There is no doubt about this.

    However, ( and this has been my point all along ) looking at the big picture, we just don't have the RESOURCES to have the kind of troop exposure that we have in Iraq or need in "post-war" Iraq. This is a huge tactical mistake, and the fact that the First Armored Division has to stay on for more than the contracted year is a prime example of the fact that we just don't have the resources, nor did we ever at this point in time, to invade Iraq!

    As a result, we are risking the lives of young men and women over there because we just don't have the resources to protect them. Take a look at that supply convoy that got burnt to the ground by Iraqi insurgents. That is a reflection that those supply convoys were not protected. Plain and simple. And it makes our Generals look like "amateurs"

    Again, I repeat that Lt. General John Vines, the senior commander in Afghanistan recently requested one more Army battalion be deployed to that country, and service leaders could not find one in the "active" force!

    This war in Iraq has been a tremendous diversion in fighting the war on terrorism . . . Plain and simple. It will continue to suck huge resources from our military for years to come, it will compromise our Defense Department's Budget, cause the cancellation of current weapons programs, and be a huge black hole that I'm afraid, will cost us our war on terrorism. Brent Scowcroft, the NSA under George Bush, Sr. tried to warn everyone of just these same issues, back in August of 2002, but Dubya didn't want to listen.

    Our military was in the process of being "transformed" from the Cold War structure to a net-concentric command and control ISR type of military that could respond to assymetrical attack. Now, we will see much of the DoD's budget go to simply maintaining the status quo and the military operations in Iraq while our military "transformation" goes on hold, along with all the new platforms that was to come with that change.

    Again, this war is a huge tactical mistake on several levels. The UN isn't involved . . . it's us versus them. We didn't retain the Iraqi military. Same old, same old. And our military readiness is weakend to such a state that we can't even rotate any fresh troops into Iraq. In fact, the ones that have come back to the USA after their tour might just have to go back in again, on very short notice.

    Obviously the Administration thought that this invasion would have been wrapped-up months ago and there would be "dancing in the streets". But due to some huge miscalculations by the Bush Administration, our military has become vulnerable to such an extent that we are watching supply convoys get burnt to the ground. It's become almost Mickey Mouse the way that this administration has made one tactical error after another.

    What a bunch of rookies.
    What a shame.

    And we have compromised the lives of our 18 and 19 year old kids that are over there. That is just about the worst thing that I can think of. And I blame Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush for putting those troops at such a risk. It's one thing to die in a firefight. It's entirely another because your supply convoy got burnt to the ground because of a lack of troops to protect that convoy.

    Do I make myself clear now?
    #13     Apr 13, 2004
  4. Waggie, Waggie, Waggie, each click of the keyboard to HappyStrokerBoy is a waste of your time.

    Don't you get it yet? This member is incapable of rational thought! He just posts to irritate us and to read his own posts.

    How he made it this far is a wonder.

    Don't waste your time with that moron, dude.

    #14     Apr 13, 2004
  5. That was my last post to him.
    He can live in the Land of George Bush Denial.

    Perhaps he too can be on a plane that is flown into a building someday, while our esteemed Attorney General who has not made counter-terrorism measures a priority rides around in a "private" jet because he knows that something is up.

    This whole Administration can go fuck themselves.
    From Cheney to Rove (Goebbells), to Condi Rice, Rumsfeld, and "Frat-Boy" Dubya. The only person that actually has some balls, shows some true leadership values and has a conscious is Colin Powell. But it's too late for him, he's already been "pimped" by the Administration and been made out to be a fool in front of the entire United Nations.
    #15     Apr 13, 2004
  6. I sense your (rightful) frustration, Wag. There is not a day go by when I do not cringe at this present administration's utter... stupidity.

    The quenching of Bush's insane fire (campaign) may very well prove to be the Bin Laden documents warning of a strike.

    I watched a widow of one of the guys who got killed in the Twin Towers attack 9/11.

    She seemed rational (much more than Bush and his half-baked admin). And SHE said, essentially, Bush effed up - it totally could have been prevented.

    And to hear HER say it... well... I think she most accurately reflects what Americans like you and me are feeling and thinking.

    Stupid shit doesn't last forever, Waggie, so just relax. Bush will be found out for what he is.

    Things will work out, you'll see.

    #16     Apr 13, 2004
  7. I write this:
    And you respond with:

    So I guess I shouldn't count on getting a Christmas card from you this year?!?

    I must say, Wag, having reached out an olive branch to you and to receive a reply wishing me death, I really feel for your parents. If you know who they are.

    But I don't wish for your death.

    Unlike you (or al-Qaida terrorists, for that matter,) I don't yearn for the destruction of fellow Americans, whether or not I agree with their politics. Instead my hope for you resides in the knowledge that you are still growing, and that upon reaching junior high and puberty, your intellect will mature and you will be able to look to a source other than The National Enquirer as your main source of news and opinions.

    Although you possess zero debate skills and an unwillingness to respond to questions resulting from your ridiculous posts, there is one thing about you that I do like and am very grateful for: I can't see you.

    ROFL! Yeah, like how you had me on Ignore?!?

    You and Trade(jack)Off run along now and watch PBS Kids, but then it's into your jammies and straight to bed young man!
    #17     Apr 13, 2004
  8. "If you know who they are."

    I think he's trying to say that your mother is a crack whore, Waggie.

    : /

    #18     Apr 13, 2004
  9. LOL! JackOff, you need to let Waggie do his own, um, "thinking." I wasn't at all saying his mother is a crack whore. Interesting how you came to that conclusion. Is it from personal experience?

    You're like a frantic sidekick dog trying to stir the pot and agitate your buddy Waggie by sniffing his balls all the time. And apparently he likes your sniffing. A lot!

    And Waggie, when you do grow up someday, you won't need meatheads like JackOff to spur you on or put thoughts in your head. Instead, you'll come up with assinine ideas that are all your own.
    #19     Apr 13, 2004