51 dead in september. 55 so far this month. 8 of the 55 just today in one attack.....

[Wicked Jester]

ROE's vs. trying to win the hearts and minds of the general population has ALWAYS been a problem when the enemy doesn't give a rat's ass who they hide behind. It was a problem in Nam, it was a problem in Iraq, it is a problem in Afghanistan.

What IS our goal? That is what is something that definitely needs to be CAREFULLY mulled over. You do not win hearts and minds by "kill them all and let god sort them out".

First you saturate the cities and towns. You secure the citizens. When bombs and IUD'S aren't killing civilians, they have a tendency to get behind you. Iraq is the case in point. That was never done in vietnam. It was finally done in Iraq, and we see the success it was.

Secondly, you secure the Pakistan border. Seal it off. You give the bogies no place to run.

Third, overwhelming force in the mountain regions. Aggressive use of air power. cut 'em off and kill 'em.

Fourth, aggressive intellligence measures. Let the CIA and military interrogators do their damn jobs. Enough with the witch hunt bullshit.

Fifth, effectively train civilian police forces. Effectively train Afghan military forces.

Sixth, Government and infrastructure.

How to seal off a border that even the countries involved cannot do?

I'm all ears. Enlighten us.

TROOPS!, technology. air support. Pressure on Pakistan to secure the areas we can't.

Obviously, it's not possible to build a big ol' giant fence. But we have the resources to secure large portions of it. The enemy needs to be made aware that, yeah' you might get across, but chances are, you're going to get blasted to hell.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Wicked Jester, I'm curious, were you anywhere near this critical of BOOOOSH when we were getting hammered in Iraq and he flat out said that he wasn't going to change policy?

My guess. No.

Your guess was wrong now, wasn't it?

 

[bodecea]

First you saturate the cities and towns. You secure the citizens. When bombs and IUD'S aren't killing civilians, they have a tendency to get behind you. Iraq is the case in point. That was never done in vietnam. It was finally done in Iraq, and we see the success it was.

Secondly, you secure the Pakistan border. Seal it off. You give the bogies no place to run.

Third, overwhelming force in the mountain regions. Aggressive use of air power. cut 'em off and kill 'em.

Fourth, aggressive intellligence measures. Let the CIA and military interrogators do their damn jobs. Enough with the witch hunt bullshit.

Fifth, effectively train civilian police forces. Effectively train Afghan military forces.

Sixth, Government and infrastructure.

How to seal off a border that even the countries involved cannot do?

I'm all ears. Enlighten us.

TROOPS!, technology. air support. Pressure on Pakistan to secure the areas we can't.

Obviously, it's not possible to build a big ol' giant fence. But we have the resources to secure large portions of it. The enemy needs to be made aware that, yeah' you might get across, but chances are, you're going to get blasted to hell.

We cannot even control our own border...how do you plan on controlling a border on one of the most mountainous, dry areas in the world?

How much money do you plan on throwing at this?

 

[bodecea]

Wicked Jester, I'm curious, were you anywhere near this critical of BOOOOSH when we were getting hammered in Iraq and he flat out said that he wasn't going to change policy?

My guess. No.

Your guess was wrong now, wasn't it?

What? You think we believed you?

 

[Old Rocks]

The only way that the border of Afghanistan can be sealed is if the people that live on either side of it desire it to be sealed. We do not have enough troops in all of our armed services to seal that border if the people that live there do not want it to be sealed. You seem to forget that our technology does not work so well during storms, the same for our air capability.

Most Afghans have been shooting guns since they teethed. Even with our technical advantage, we have trouble repelling their attacks. In the mountains, when we were the ones on the move, we would be easy targets.

When Bush failed to make the neccessary efforts to win over the Afghan people in order to go on the Iraq adventure, we lost that war. The Taliban went from total defeat to the point where they now control the most of Afghanistan.

 

[Si modo]

My guess. No.

Your guess was wrong now, wasn't it?

What? You think we believed you?

He actually has the equipment to piss higher and farther than you do. I realize you wish it were not the case, but it is.

 

[bodecea]

Your guess was wrong now, wasn't it?

What? You think we believed you?

He actually has the equipment to piss higher and farther than you do. I realize you wish it were not the case, but it is.

You are definitely fixated on my "package" or lack thereof. This is about the 4th or 5th time you've commented on my plumbing rather than the topic at hand. Creepy in a stalker kind of way.

 

[Care4all]

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Note to those like Jay the retarded Canadian... Bush wasn't in office in 1998.

sure.

and they RUSHED IN TO WAR against him because of it....


NOT!

guess you don't know what carrying the big stick, but not ever using it meant....

NO ONE started a full fledged war in Iraq under Clinton.....

the republicans RIDICULED the democrats complaing about saddam at the time....saying clinton was wagging the dog...to avoid the monica scandal....

 

[Si modo]

What? You think we believed you?

He actually has the equipment to piss higher and farther than you do. I realize you wish it were not the case, but it is.

You are definitely fixated on my "package" or lack thereof. This is about the 4th or 5th time you've commented on my plumbing rather than the topic at hand. Creepy in a stalker kind of way.

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

 

[bodecea]

He actually has the equipment to piss higher and farther than you do. I realize you wish it were not the case, but it is.

You are definitely fixated on my "package" or lack thereof. This is about the 4th or 5th time you've commented on my plumbing rather than the topic at hand. Creepy in a stalker kind of way.

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

 

[Misty]

The decision comes down to stay and fight or leave and give up.

Meanwhile young boys are dying in record numbers

 

[saveliberty]

You are definitely fixated on my "package" or lack thereof. This is about the 4th or 5th time you've commented on my plumbing rather than the topic at hand. Creepy in a stalker kind of way.

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

 

[Wicked Jester]

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Note to those like Jay the retarded Canadian... Bush wasn't in office in 1998.

sure.

and they RUSHED IN TO WAR against him because of it....


NOT!

guess you don't know what carrying the big stick, but not ever using it meant....

NO ONE started a full fledged war in Iraq under Clinton.....

the republicans RIDICULED the democrats complaing about saddam at the time....saying clinton was wagging the dog...to avoid the monica scandal....

True!

The dems voted to "RUSH IN TO WAR" IN '03" by overwhelming vote.

Clinton himself even supported going in. Funny how you libs never want to mention that lil' FACT!

 

[Si modo]

You are definitely fixated on my "package" or lack thereof. This is about the 4th or 5th time you've commented on my plumbing rather than the topic at hand. Creepy in a stalker kind of way.

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

Thanks for giving all a demonstration of the intellectual speed of yours. One just can't script this any better.

 

[bodecea]

The decision comes down to stay and fight or leave and give up.

Meanwhile young boys are dying in record numbers

Yes they are.

 

[bodecea]

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

??????? (while looking forward to you posting that same smilie on Si Modo's post, the one I was replying to)

 

[Wicked Jester]

Sadaam could have prevented it all. All he had to do was come clean once and for all.

Sadaam brought WAR to his doorstep. He alone is solely responsible. DEAL WITH IT!

He continually rattled his sabre. Instead of having a few mis-guided cruise missiles fired by Clinton, Bush took that sabre and shoved it firmly up his ass once and for all.

No more proof is necessary. The proof is in Sadaams own words:

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/24/60minutes/main3749494_page4.shtml?tag=contentMain

Of course you libs will ignore it, because the truth hurts you people big time.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Actually, it's more of a commentary on your intellectual speed - pissing contests. I am not surprised you couldn't comprehend that, either.

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

Thanks for giving all a demonstration of the intellectual speed of yours. One just can't script this any better.

No shit!

LMAO!

 

[saveliberty]

AH....I get it now....when YOU are talking about someone's intellect, it automatically makes you think of their plumbing. Got it!


I can see why you would....all things considered.

??????? (while looking forward to you posting that same smilie on Si Modo's post, the one I was replying to)

It was a two for one special. Now you got me doing it. Grrr...

 

[bodecea]

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Note to those like Jay the retarded Canadian... Bush wasn't in office in 1998.

sure.

and they RUSHED IN TO WAR against him because of it....


NOT!

guess you don't know what carrying the big stick, but not ever using it meant....

NO ONE started a full fledged war in Iraq under Clinton.....

the republicans RIDICULED the democrats complaing about saddam at the time....saying clinton was wagging the dog...to avoid the monica scandal....

True!

The dems voted to "RUSH IN TO WAR" IN '03" by overwhelming vote.

Isn't this delightful? Wicked J. FORGETS that the Republicans had the majority...it's the Democrats who voted for war. Yes, the majority of Democrats did....but they were STILL the minority. The Republicans OWN this war...lock, stock & barrel. It's telling that Wicked J. is trying to pawn it off now.

Clinton himself even supported going in. Funny how you libs never want to mention that lil' FACT!

Actually, many of us have and I agree he did. But you want to pretend we never admit that.....just more evidence that you aren't very bright...or very honest. What a surprise.