What Did You Do In The War On Terror, Daddy

[red states rule]

well...I certainly don't think you want them to kill the doctors and nurses....of course you want them to kill the terrorists....I would never suggest otherwise...But also...you clearly think they need to fight harder than they are fighting. Who they are fighting is immaterial to the fact that you think they are relatively lazy and need to, somehow, fight harder.

and again....who are we surrendering to? WHo are these "terrorists" - these handful of deadenders in their final throes - that are capable of taking over the country of Iraq from an AMerican trained armed force?

Being the arrogrant lib that you are - you pick one word out of the post and lie about it

I am use to it with you and others of your ilk

It is surrender - and you have no problem running from the enemy. If that is what your party is for - so are you

Even if it hurts your country

 

[Gunny]

Plain and simple ... the mightiest armed forces in the history of the World can be rendered ineffective by piss-poor tactics and strategy, and being used outside its primary role.

The finger gets pointed at the civilian leadership who don't know a damned thing about how to use a weapon properly.

 

[red states rule]

Plain and simple ... the mightiest armed forces in the history of the World can be rendered ineffective by piss-poor tactics and strategy, and being used outside its primary role.

The finger gets pointed at the civilian leadership who don't know a damned thing about how to use a weapon properly.

I agree mistakes have been made

I say turn the US military loose and let them do their job

 

[maineman]

you didn't answer this:

and again....who are we surrendering to? WHo are these "terrorists" - these handful of deadenders in their final throes - that are capable of taking over the country of Iraq from an AMerican trained armed force?

 

[red states rule]

you didn't answer this:

and again....who are we surrendering to? WHo are these "terrorists" - these handful of deadenders in their final throes - that are capable of taking over the country of Iraq from an AMerican trained armed force?

You want the US to surrender to the terrorists and Iran

Whatever your party dictates you obey without question

 

[Gunny]

I agree mistakes have been made

I say turn the US military loose and let them do their job

I say turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and let them fight for their own damned freedom. Our staying long enough to get the Iraq forces up to speed in, IMO, a rather generous assist.

While I don't agree with publicly announced withdrawal timetables, I DO think the Iraqi government has allowed us to carry its burden long enough with no real effort put forth to shoulder their own load.

If they continue down this same path, there WILL come a time when I say "screw 'em."

The only real viable option a foreign military force has at this point is to divide Iraq into three states and enforce each border by armed force. Anything else is just going to amount to the Saudi's and Persians at war to divy the place up while the kurds sti and watch, hoping they kill each other off.

If we aren't going to conquer, occupy and keep Iraq, we don't belong sitting between two Middle Eastern forces fighting over Arab soil.

 

[red states rule]

I say turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and let them fight for their own damned freedom. Our staying long enough to get the Iraq forces up to speed in, IMO, a rather generous assist.

While I don't agree with publicly announced withdrawal timetables, I DO think the Iraqi government has allowed us to carry its burden long enough with no real effort put forth to shoulder their own load.

If they continue down this same path, there WILL come a time when I say "screw 'em."

The only real viable option a foreign military force has at this point is to divide Iraq into three states and enforce each border by armed force. Anything else is just going to amount to the Saudi's and Persians at war to divy the place up while the kurds sti and watch, hoping they kill each other off.

If we aren't going to conquer, occupy and keep Iraq, we don't belong sitting between two Middle Eastern forces fighting over Arab soil.

Gunny - there is progress being made and the iraqis are stepping up

http://www.elpasotimes.com/military/ci_5858869

 

[Gunny]

Gunny - there is progress being made and the iraqis are stepping up

http://www.elpasotimes.com/military/ci_5858869

Cool. Then the Iraqi's and I have no problem. However, they need to assume ALL responsibility, The sooner the better.

 

[red states rule]

Cool. Then the Iraqi's and I have no problem. However, they need to assume ALL responsibility, The sooner the better.

As soon as they are ready to protect their country from terrorists and Iran - I will be ahead of you saying lets get out

If we leave to ealry - little Adolf from Iran will be running things in Iraq and we will have more problems then we have now

 

[maineman]

You want the US to surrender to the terrorists and Iran

Whatever your party dictates you obey without question

did you notice that you didn't answer my question?

who are we surrendering to? WHo are these "terrorists" - these handful of deadenders in their final throes - that are capable of taking over the country of Iraq from an AMerican trained armed force?

Are you saying that a handful of deadender Al Qaeda terrorists will overwhelm the Iraqi army and take over the entire country of Iraq against the will of the Iraqis? Is that really what you suggest??

Or are you suggesting that, after the dust settles and the shiites win the civil war that they aren't a dead certain lock to align themselves way more closely with their brethren in Tehran than they ever will to America?

If we spend five more years and ten thousand more lives to see a stable Iraqi government and military force.... that government will be predominately shi'ite because the shi'ites are the majority sect in Iraq.... and when we finally do leave, Iran will be a major influence on that government and their strongest ally.

That doesn't sound too much like the vibrant multicultural jeffersonian democracy blossoming on the banks of the Euphrates that we were supposed to be creating.

 

[Truthmatters]

Cool. Then the Iraqi's and I have no problem. However, they need to assume ALL responsibility, The sooner the better.

I thought you wouldnt just accept one article on a subject for it to be proven true?

Gunny is this applying different standards to what you want to believe and what is true?

 

[red states rule]

did you notice that you didn't answer my question?

who are we surrendering to? WHo are these "terrorists" - these handful of deadenders in their final throes - that are capable of taking over the country of Iraq from an AMerican trained armed force?

Are you saying that a handful of deadender Al Qaeda terrorists will overwhelm the Iraqi army and take over the entire country of Iraq against the will of the Iraqis? Is that really what you suggest??

Or are you suggesting that, after the dust settles and the shiites win the civil war that they aren't a dead certain lock to align themselves way more closely with their brethren in Tehran than they ever will to America?

If we spend five more years and ten thousand more lives to see a stable Iraqi government and military force.... that government will be predominately shi'ite because the shi'ites are the majority sect in Iraq.... and when we finally do leave, Iran will be a major influence on that government and their strongest ally.

That doesn't sound too much like the vibrant multicultural jeffersonian democracy blossoming on the banks of the Euphrates that we were supposed to be creating.

I have numbnuts - and others have tried to explain it to you

You just ignore the facts and keep repeating the liberal talking points

Leaving Iraq will open the door for the terrorists and Iran to take over - slaughter millions - and take the oil money

Then you can rant and blame Bush for everything - as you do now

 

[maineman]

I have numbnuts - and others have tried to explain it to you

You just ignore the facts and keep repeating the liberal talking points

Leaving Iraq will open the door for the terrorists and Iran to take over - slaughter millions - and take the oil money

Then you can rant and blame Bush for everything - as you do now

RSR...all you ever do is spew talking points...you are iincapable of carrying on a simple conversation. I am asking you who these terrorists are. Are they sunnis? are they shiites? I am asking you who do you think will eventually control the Iraqi government? SHiites , as they are the predominant majority of the populatoin? And if shiites control the governmetn of Iraq, why do you think they won't align themselves with Iran whenever they get power? Answer my questions. SHow me what you know about this complex situation. My GOD, man...you know so little, you think that persian shiites would bankroll sunni arabs as they kill Iraqi shiites. That makes no sense. YOu cannot explain yourself about this situation, because, clearly, you don't really know what you are talking about.

Now you can either prove me wrong, by answering my questions and carrying on a debate about the issues, or you can prove me right - again - by avoiding those questions.

your pick.

 

[red states rule]

RSR...all you ever do is spew talking points...you are iincapable of carrying on a simple conversation. I am asking you who these terrorists are. Are they sunnis? are they shiites? I am asking you who do you think will eventually control the Iraqi government? SHiites , as they are the predominant majority of the populatoin? And if shiites control the governmetn of Iraq, why do you think they won't align themselves with Iran whenever they get power? Answer my questions. SHow me what you know about this complex situation. My GOD, man...you know so little, you think that persian shiites would bankroll sunni arabs as they kill Iraqi shiites. That makes no sense. YOu cannot explain yourself about this situation, because, clearly, you don't really know what you are talking about.

Now you can either prove me wrong, by answering my questions and carrying on a debate about the issues, or you can prove me right - again - by avoiding those questions.


your pick.

Keep using the talking points MM - that is really all you have left

The terrosrists (AQ) are there and being backed by Iran

Your hate prevents you from admitting it - meanwhile, being a loyal lib, you opush for surrender and defeat of the US military

 

[Gunny]

I thought you wouldnt just accept one article on a subject for it to be proven true?

Gunny is this applying different standards to what you want to believe and what is true?

Pitiful and just a bit desperate. Dude, give it up. There are no inconsistencies in my statements. I make sure there are not for just such petty attempts as yours. Not to mention the ass-backwardness of your attempt.

If you wish to refute what RSR has posted, then your issue is with HIM and/or the source of his post, not with me. My response to RSR is merely the quite obvious supposition that if he is correct, then he has nothing to worry about, but neither accept nor reject his post.

Before you presume to engage me in a game of semantics, I suggest a few more years of schooling are in order for you. I was educated by the best left-wing journalism and English compostion minds of the day. I know your game better than you.

 

[maineman]

Keep using the talking points MM - that is really all you have left

The terrosrists (AQ) are there and being backed by Iran

Your hate prevents you from admitting it - meanwhile, being a loyal lib, you opush for surrender and defeat of the US military

can you explain to me why a persian shi'ite country who is pumping a lot of money and weapons into Iraq to support Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi militia, would also provide assistance to a group of sunni arabs who was killing shi'ites in Iraq?

Talk to me about that. Explain to me why Iran would do something so detrimental to the shi'ites in Iraq?

 

[red states rule]

Iran's Secret Plan For Mayhem
By ELI LAKE
Staff Reporter of the Sun
January 3, 2007



WASHINGTON — Iran is supporting both Sunni and Shiite terrorists in the Iraqi civil war, according to secret Iranian documents captured by Americans in Iraq.

The news that American forces had captured Iranians in Iraq was widely reported last month, but less well known is that the Iranians were carrying documents that offered Americans insight into Iranian activities in Iraq.

An American intelligence official said the new material, which has been authenticated within the intelligence community, confirms "that Iran is working closely with both the Shiite militias and Sunni Jihadist groups." The source was careful to stress that the Iranian plans do not extend to cooperation with Baathist groups fighting the government in Baghdad, and said the documents rather show how the Quds Force — the arm of Iran's revolutionary guard that supports Shiite Hezbollah, Sunni Hamas, and Shiite death squads — is working with individuals affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq and Ansar al-Sunna.

Another American official who has seen the summaries of the reporting affiliated with the arrests said it comprised a "smoking gun." "We found plans for attacks, phone numbers affiliated with Sunni bad guys, a lot of things that filled in the blanks on what these guys are up to," the official said.

One of the documents captured in the raids, according to two American officials and one Iraqi official, is an assessment of the Iraq civil war and new strategy from the Quds Force. According to the Iraqi source, that assessment is the equivalent of " Iran's Iraq Study Group," a reference to the bipartisan American commission that released war strategy recommendations after the November 7 elections. The document concludes, according to these sources, that Iraq's Sunni neighbors will step up their efforts to aid insurgent groups and that it is imperative for Iran to redouble efforts to retain influence with them, as well as with Shiite militias.

http://www.nysun.com/article/46032

 

[red states rule]

MM - before you dismiss this out of hand

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=2688501

 

[maineman]

MM - before you dismiss this out of hand

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=2688501

I completely concur with this article.

Cut and paste the sentence from this article which supports your assertion that Iran is arming AQ or any other sunni group, for that matter.

It is YOUR link. I'll wait.

 

[red states rule]

U.S. officials say they have found smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories. According to a senior defense official, coalition forces have recently seized Iranian-made weapons and munitions that bear manufacturing dates in 2006.