Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
I'm all for action, but the problem with that is the average US citizen believes the fighting should be over very quickly or the troops should be brought back home. That's not the way to fight wars and, believe me, pulling out the troops before the job is done kills moral.
The average US citizen also believes the Military should fight with some sort of retarded set of gentlemanly rules. The enemy won't so we look weak and indecisive. Now I'm not talking indiscriminate killing of civilians but we need to treat the enemy as something other than someone that we are having a minor disagreement with.
Last the issue in Syria with ISIS ground troops should be sent in but with no absolute time limit on combat operations. This will not be the quick war all the chairborne generals think it will be, There will be no grand armies meeting on the honorable field of battle. This will be Urban combat some of the nastiest type of fighting there is.
So all of you calling for action remember what you're asking for when the bodies start coming home don't suddenly change your mind and decide the cost is too high.
I agree with your post. The US military is too often used as a police force separating belligerents. The US military was created for one reason and that is to smash things. Namely things and people that threaten this country. They happen to be very good at it. Asking them to be the fodder in between two warring factions never ends well.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
This is one of the problems with politicians running the military. Except in cases of all-out war, the military should be asked what objectives can be achieved with minimal (or at least acceptable) losses. Pie-in-the-sky directives are unfair to the people carrying them out and seldom turn out well.
For example, the Iraq invasion should have resulted in partitioning that country into several military districts that would have been easier and safer for our troops to control. Instead, our military was used as a national police force with the aim of setting up a "democratic" national government to replace Saddam Hussein. If we had maintained the autonomy of these districts until THEY decided to join a national government, we would not have seen the chaos which ensued Obama/Clinton's precipitous withdrawal for their own political purposes.
Dumb enough? I didn't meet to many soldiers while I was in that didn't have at least one degree or working towards one. Some of the smartest men I ever knew were the "cannon fodder" you are sneering at.I was never dumb enough to be cannon fodder, but I got well-paid for building their death machines.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
That's right, have a defeatist attitude from the beginning. Paint are you a vet? Sure doesn't sound like it.
The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
I'm all for action, but the problem with that is the average US citizen believes the fighting should be over very quickly or the troops should be brought back home. That's not the way to fight wars and, believe me, pulling out the troops before the job is done kills moral.
The average US citizen also believes the Military should fight with some sort of retarded set of gentlemanly rules. The enemy won't so we look weak and indecisive. Now I'm not talking indiscriminate killing of civilians but we need to treat the enemy as something other than someone that we are having a minor disagreement with.
Last the issue in Syria with ISIS ground troops should be sent in but with no absolute time limit on combat operations. This will not be the quick war all the chairborne generals think it will be, There will be no grand armies meeting on the honorable field of battle. This will be Urban combat some of the nastiest type of fighting there is.
So all of you calling for action remember what you're asking for when the bodies start coming home don't suddenly change your mind and decide the cost is too high.
Well said. It's the same for law enforcement. Countless say how cops should or shouldn't do the job. Few are willing to strap on a gun and vest and go patrol a shit hole.
For the record...I'm a terror hard liner but I think the effort should be securing our homeland. Deploy Army to our borders and ports of entry...not the Middle East. Keep them out.
The politicians and whiny ass civilians lose the wars not the troops.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
Wars like these are lost no matter how you fight them so, don't.The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
I'm all for action, but the problem with that is the average US citizen believes the fighting should be over very quickly or the troops should be brought back home. That's not the way to fight wars and, believe me, pulling out the troops before the job is done kills moral.
The average US citizen also believes the Military should fight with some sort of retarded set of gentlemanly rules. The enemy won't so we look weak and indecisive. Now I'm not talking indiscriminate killing of civilians but we need to treat the enemy as something other than someone that we are having a minor disagreement with.
Last the issue in Syria with ISIS ground troops should be sent in but with no absolute time limit on combat operations. This will not be the quick war all the chairborne generals think it will be, There will be no grand armies meeting on the honorable field of battle. This will be Urban combat some of the nastiest type of fighting there is.
So all of you calling for action remember what you're asking for when the bodies start coming home don't suddenly change your mind and decide the cost is too high.
Well said. It's the same for law enforcement. Countless say how cops should or shouldn't do the job. Few are willing to strap on a gun and vest and go patrol a shit hole.
For the record...I'm a terror hard liner but I think the effort should be securing our homeland. Deploy Army to our borders and ports of entry...not the Middle East. Keep them out.The politicians and whiny ass civilians lose the wars not the troops.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
Dumb enough? I didn't meet to many soldiers while I was in that didn't have at least one degree or working towards one. Some of the smartest men I ever knew were the "cannon fodder" you are sneering at.I was never dumb enough to be cannon fodder, but I got well-paid for building their death machines.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
That's right, have a defeatist attitude from the beginning. Paint are you a vet? Sure doesn't sound like it.
This thread is completely baseless. The US has no right or legal justification for inserting troops into Syria and doing so would undoubtedly be met with resistance from the governing authority in Syria and by extension the Russians and Iranians. If the US government really wanted put an end to ISIS in Syria they would have long ago put diplomatic pressure on NATO ally Turkey and also our Gulf Coast partners to end their material support for ISIS. As Russia is demonstrating, the ground troops are already on the ground, in the form of the Syrian army.The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
I'm all for action, but the problem with that is the average US citizen believes the fighting should be over very quickly or the troops should be brought back home. That's not the way to fight wars and, believe me, pulling out the troops before the job is done kills moral.
The average US citizen also believes the Military should fight with some sort of retarded set of gentlemanly rules. The enemy won't so we look weak and indecisive. Now I'm not talking indiscriminate killing of civilians but we need to treat the enemy as something other than someone that we are having a minor disagreement with.
Last the issue in Syria with ISIS ground troops should be sent in but with no absolute time limit on combat operations. This will not be the quick war all the chairborne generals think it will be, There will be no grand armies meeting on the honorable field of battle. This will be Urban combat some of the nastiest type of fighting there is.
So all of you calling for action remember what you're asking for when the bodies start coming home don't suddenly change your mind and decide the cost is too high.
Dumb enough? I didn't meet to many soldiers while I was in that didn't have at least one degree or working towards one. Some of the smartest men I ever knew were the "cannon fodder" you are sneering at.I was never dumb enough to be cannon fodder, but I got well-paid for building their death machines.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
That's right, have a defeatist attitude from the beginning. Paint are you a vet? Sure doesn't sound like it.
Wars like these are lost no matter how you fight them so, don't.The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
I'm all for action, but the problem with that is the average US citizen believes the fighting should be over very quickly or the troops should be brought back home. That's not the way to fight wars and, believe me, pulling out the troops before the job is done kills moral.
The average US citizen also believes the Military should fight with some sort of retarded set of gentlemanly rules. The enemy won't so we look weak and indecisive. Now I'm not talking indiscriminate killing of civilians but we need to treat the enemy as something other than someone that we are having a minor disagreement with.
Last the issue in Syria with ISIS ground troops should be sent in but with no absolute time limit on combat operations. This will not be the quick war all the chairborne generals think it will be, There will be no grand armies meeting on the honorable field of battle. This will be Urban combat some of the nastiest type of fighting there is.
So all of you calling for action remember what you're asking for when the bodies start coming home don't suddenly change your mind and decide the cost is too high.
Well said. It's the same for law enforcement. Countless say how cops should or shouldn't do the job. Few are willing to strap on a gun and vest and go patrol a shit hole.
For the record...I'm a terror hard liner but I think the effort should be securing our homeland. Deploy Army to our borders and ports of entry...not the Middle East. Keep them out.The politicians and whiny ass civilians lose the wars not the troops.Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
Does Obama's rule of engagement of don't shoot until you're shot at first sound familiar?Nobody is stopping troops from winning wars. But some people are NOT DECLARING WAR and are not worried about sending troops to die for bullshit reasons.
Does Obama's rule of engagement of don't shoot until you're shot at first sound familiar?Nobody is stopping troops from winning wars. But some people are NOT DECLARING WAR and are not worried about sending troops to die for bullshit reasons.
Since they are usually fighting wars that were lost before they started, that is a given.I don't have a problem with sending troops to fight ISIS. My issue is with the politicians and armchair generals not letting our troops win the wars we ask them to fight.These types love a good war. They will gladly wave the flag, and the coffins parade by. Without that they'd lose interest.
I know. There is no reason for it other than to get our boys killed. I hope President Trump or Cruz has Obama tried for treason against the United States.Does Obama's rule of engagement of don't shoot until you're shot at first sound familiar?Nobody is stopping troops from winning wars. But some people are NOT DECLARING WAR and are not worried about sending troops to die for bullshit reasons.
They also cannot do raids at night and must advertise the raid 24 hours in advance so locals can leave. Seriously.
If American police had the same rules of engagement as the Obama Admin had put on our military....half would quit and the criminals would run this country. It's no surprise Iraq and the surrounding region is in chaos and ISIS took over.
Obamas ROE would fail at LAPD. And that motherfucker tried to apply it to a WAR ZONE??!!!
Lee Harvey Oswald and Tim McVeigh and friends all served.The recent wave of patriotic get em BS is aggravating. Those screaming the loudest seem to be the people with the least amount of skin in the game i.e they are not serving in the military or have children that do.
