How Much You Wanna Bet We Put The Amount Of Troops Back In Iraq We Should've Left There?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Oh get a load of this guy. Jake , are you trying to say at some point I said I was offered a promotion to flag officer? Because Jake that is just stupid. The Army doesn't work that , they don't jump light colonels straight to General.

Or is the more likely scenario that you simply didn't realize that Colonel was not a flag officer?

If you can kill enough there is a good possibility...

I'm sure it's happened in war time or whatever, but it's a rarity, and at NO time did I say or imply that I could have been a General.

Jake is just drunk or something.

I was in 1982-88, SGT's had 999 out of 1000 points to get for promotion..no one swelled with rank then and promotions were slow. I had passed the OCS written exam and was going to hit the basic training part when my wife runs off with an officer and leaves me a single parent, so I got out on a hardship discharge and left my boyhood dreams behind..

Sorry to hear that, moonglow. That sucks.

That's ok, he joined the Air Farce and was an electronics maint. fellow on the ICBM's in Montana..

Well, being sent to Montana certainly is a punishment.

 

[EconChick]

Oh get a load of this guy. Jake , are you trying to say at some point I said I was offered a promotion to flag officer? Because Jake that is just stupid. The Army doesn't work that , they don't jump light colonels straight to General.

Or is the more likely scenario that you simply didn't realize that Colonel was not a flag officer?

If you can kill enough there is a good possibility...

I'm sure it's happened in war time or whatever, but it's a rarity, and at NO time did I say or imply that I could have been a General.

Jake is just drunk or something.

I was in 1982-88, SGT's had 999 out of 1000 points to get for promotion..no one swelled with rank then and promotions were slow. I had passed the OCS written exam and was going to hit the basic training part when my wife runs off with an officer and leaves me a single parent, so I got out on a hardship discharge and left my boyhood dreams behind..

Sorry to hear that, moonglow. That sucks.

That's ok, he joined the Air Farce and was an electronics maint. fellow on the ICBM's in Montana..

Who? rdean was Air Force on ICBMs? If so now it makes sense, LOL

 

[EconChick]

Wait Montana? You mean the Dakotas?

 

[Moonglow]

If you can kill enough there is a good possibility...

I'm sure it's happened in war time or whatever, but it's a rarity, and at NO time did I say or imply that I could have been a General.

Jake is just drunk or something.

I was in 1982-88, SGT's had 999 out of 1000 points to get for promotion..no one swelled with rank then and promotions were slow. I had passed the OCS written exam and was going to hit the basic training part when my wife runs off with an officer and leaves me a single parent, so I got out on a hardship discharge and left my boyhood dreams behind..

Sorry to hear that, moonglow. That sucks.

That's ok, he joined the Air Farce and was an electronics maint. fellow on the ICBM's in Montana..

Who? rdean was Air Force on ICBMs? If so now it makes sense, LOL

No. My eldest son.....

 

[EconChick]

I'm sure it's happened in war time or whatever, but it's a rarity, and at NO time did I say or imply that I could have been a General.

Jake is just drunk or something.

I was in 1982-88, SGT's had 999 out of 1000 points to get for promotion..no one swelled with rank then and promotions were slow. I had passed the OCS written exam and was going to hit the basic training part when my wife runs off with an officer and leaves me a single parent, so I got out on a hardship discharge and left my boyhood dreams behind..

Sorry to hear that, moonglow. That sucks.

That's ok, he joined the Air Farce and was an electronics maint. fellow on the ICBM's in Montana..

Who? rdean was Air Force on ICBMs? If so now it makes sense, LOL

No. My eldest son.....

Ah, ok.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Some late breaking news....according to the chairman of the JCS...Obabble might approve boots on the ground in Iraq/Syria...on a case by case basis.THATS A NEW ONE ON ME....WAR ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS....stupid.


Obama will consider ground troops in Iraq on case-by-case basis Dempsey says Army Times armytimes.com

the slow creep of more troops on the ground

 

[jon_berzerk]

Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.

if the trend continues that is certainly possible

the really bad part of that is that we gave up

the defensive positions

this would be pretty much starting at square one again

Yep. This is why blood's still squirting from my eyes. It has been since we completely abandoned the place.

anyone with a 1/2 an ounce of sense knew it

was incredibly stupid to leave Iraq

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The real point of my OP was to remind Obama supporters should he have not pulled them all out, he's forced to go back and put them back anyway.



Obama will continue to nickel and dime our commitment there, using mostly air strikes which can degrade the enemy but not win the war.

It will have to wait until we get a President who wants to defeat the enemy (which is done by killing so many of them, regardless of how many of us they kill, that they finally scream "Uncle!"), instead of the present President who merely wants to "Send a message" to ISIS, and more importantly, to his base.

You don't give a shit about the players in the region who won't fight this terror on their own front yard.

You want guys to die so no guys in the region will have to.

The Saudis of course wouid hold off fighting while waiting to see if knuckleheaded Americans will prevail and send our own to die on the sand in Syria so Saudi sons won't have to.

Did you find a Saudi lover over there that you dont want to lose in their war?

 

[Moonglow]

Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.

if the trend continues that is certainly possible

the really bad part of that is that we gave up

the defensive positions

this would be pretty much starting at square one again

Yep. This is why blood's still squirting from my eyes. It has been since we completely abandoned the place.

anyone with a 1/2 an ounce of sense knew it

was incredibly stupid to leave Iraq

Yeah, after being there for 25 years, it's like we had roots there....

 

[EconChick]

Some late breaking news....according to the chairman of the JCS...Obabble might approve boots on the ground in Iraq/Syria...on a case by case basis.THATS A NEW ONE ON ME....WAR ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS....stupid.


Obama will consider ground troops in Iraq on case-by-case basis Dempsey says Army Times armytimes.com

the slow creep of more troops on the ground

Imagine THAT, huh, Jon.

 

[EconChick]

Obama has already put the 1400 he publicly announced over the past few weeks. After the election he will certainly pour more in. By December 31, I predict at LEAST a Brigade will be sent. By next year there will be more.

if the trend continues that is certainly possible

the really bad part of that is that we gave up

the defensive positions

this would be pretty much starting at square one again

Yep. This is why blood's still squirting from my eyes. It has been since we completely abandoned the place.

anyone with a 1/2 an ounce of sense knew it

was incredibly stupid to leave Iraq

Even a half of a half of an ounce, LOL.

 

[EconChick]

The real point of my OP was to remind Obama supporters should he have not pulled them all out, he's forced to go back and put them back anyway.



Obama will continue to nickel and dime our commitment there, using mostly air strikes which can degrade the enemy but not win the war.

It will have to wait until we get a President who wants to defeat the enemy (which is done by killing so many of them, regardless of how many of us they kill, that they finally scream "Uncle!"), instead of the present President who merely wants to "Send a message" to ISIS, and more importantly, to his base.

You don't give a shit about the players in the region who won't fight this terror on their own front yard.

You want guys to die so no guys in the region will have to.

The Saudis of course wouid hold off fighting while waiting to see if knuckleheaded Americans will prevail and send our own to die on the sand in Syria so Saudi sons won't have to.

Did you find a Saudi lover over there that you dont want to lose in their war?

Yeah, I fucked a different Saudi every day.


Next question?

 

[CitizenSeven]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

 

[EconChick]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

 

[CitizenSeven]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

 

[EconChick]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

Show me where I said Iraq attacked us in that post?



Crickets.

 

[EconChick]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

Hey, just make shit up out of thin air. I've never seen so many clowns on a forum in my life that just make shit up.

 

[CitizenSeven]

It's a mess. Write it off. If ISIS wins, and acts like the bogey men the far left and right are making them out to be and actually attacks the US, then deal with them. This pre-emptive nonsense causes more trouble than it could ever prevent.

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

Show me where I said Iraq attacked us in that post?



Crickets.

I didn't contend you had made that claim. I'm pointing out pre-emptive war is idiotic, couter-productive, and immoral. They haven't attacked the US, so by attacking them, the US is goading them into doing it. It's circular reasoning, and a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[EconChick]

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

Show me where I said Iraq attacked us in that post?



Crickets.

I didn't contend you had made that claim. I'm pointing out pre-emptive war is idiotic, couter-productive, and immoral. They haven't attacked the US, so by attacking them, the US is goading them into doing it. It's circular reasoning, and a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Oh, well at least thank you for that clarification. Just realize you worded it with ambiguity.

 

[EconChick]

You remind me of all the myopics in govt I used to try to warn before AQ hit in 2001. No I never, nor did anyone, predict they'd use planes or do what they did. What some of us could clearly see though that they had a very clear trajectory of action over the years and the next one was going to be spectacular and we knew it would hurt American interests. Some of us are experts at doing trend analysis certain things. ISIS will have an upward trajectory as well.

You remind me of "the smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud" Cheney. Sure, "trajectories". What USFG assets has ISIS attacked? What attacks have they done on the U.S.? Until they do, they're not our problem.

You remind me of the lazy bureaucrats that said the same thing when those of us in the intel community warned the US would suffer a spectacular attack before 9/11. As I've caveated, we never predicted the specifics. But their resolve we got 100%. The resolve of ISIS is even stronger. Mark my words.

And Cheney is a genius; I can't help you lack the cerebral facilities to absorb it.

Ok, so Isis hasn't attacked the US, just like Iraq hadn't attacked the US.

Show me where I said Iraq attacked us in that post?



Crickets.

I didn't contend you had made that claim. I'm pointing out pre-emptive war is idiotic, couter-productive, and immoral. They haven't attacked the US, so by attacking them, the US is goading them into doing it. It's circular reasoning, and a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Oh, and btw, Saddam didn't strike our homeland but he did fire on our aircraft. Remember the no-fly zone? You folks tend to forget there were 23 different writs Congress sited for going to war with Iraq. Only 1 was WMD.