Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:24:27 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 10/07/2010 9:32 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 20:11:26 -0400, "Harold'" wrote: - - - These whores will do anything to stay in uniform. Last time I checked O'Bama was the whore in charge. you pro terrorism? You can want our people out of there and not be pro-terrorism. So far this war is getting close to two times as long as WW II and no sight of peace. that's the nature of guerrilla insurrections. we don't have to 'win'. we just dont have to lose Which means we are not winning. neither are they And it is probably due to the fact that we in the west will not face up to what we are really fighting. We are not fighting an army but a cult of fascism and hate engrained right into families. If we can't extinguish the cult, the problem will persist. The enemy is islam itself. yep. islam is the most backwards of the world's major religions, with christianity not far behind |
#23
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:20:39 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 11:34:59 -0400, "mmc" wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 00:41:17 -0400, wrote: This is a stupid way to waste our grand kid's money at a time when the country is in so much fiscal trouble. what would be more stupid is to allow another 9/11 Al queda has moved out. we have even less chance of securing the borders there than we do here. which is OK. we win the war if we prevent the taliban from taking power. If we'd have said "Hey Mr. Taliban, if you hear some loud noises around Tora Bora, don't worry about it, just us coming in to "get some" for 9/11. Just letting you know so that you stay out of the line of fire." on 9/11 there was no functional difference between AQ and the taliban. now there is. i have no objections at all to negotiating with elements of the taliban...as long as they keep their noses clean The Taliban is not al queda. They just share a common enemy, US invaders. We empowered the Taliban. There is little chance we will ever stop them as long as we keep killing innocent civilians Yep, we're doing the recruiting for them. |
#24
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:18:07 -0400, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:10:37 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:37:00 -0400, bpuharic wrote: We have hitched our hopes to a corrupt government in a country famous for grinding up super powers, somehow thinking everything will work out for us. you guys think that 'grinding up superpowers' is a profound observation it's a cliche. afghanistan has been conquered 3 times in the last 1000 years. People have occupied Kabul but the mountains we are in were never "conquered". tell it to ghengis khan. That is not history, that is legend and folk lore. We don't have a clue how effective Khan was in controlling the tribal areas of Afghanistan. For that matter, the people there could be descendants of the Khan army. I don't know of any US policy that claims we want to "control" the tribal regions. What we want is a stable gov't that doesn't harbor terrorists, such as Al-Qaeda. |
#25
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "mmc" wrote in message g.com... The 100 in Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11. In case you haven't heard. Bin Laden's gang is supposed to be in Pakistan and he has been there since Tora Bora, about a trillion dollars and over a thousand coalition lives ago. And by driving them over the border instead of dealing with them when we had the chance, we've caused the destabilization of Pakistan by causing regional and ethnic rifts. Pakistan is a nuclear armed country and those nukes could end up in the hands of a government or faction that is controlled by or actually is al queda and/or taliban. That last round of White House ass clowns did us no favors, looking like the current group of ass clowns isn't going to fix things. We have hitched our hopes to a corrupt government in a country famous for grinding up super powers, somehow thinking everything will work out for us. We love throwing stones at other peoples corruption, but what about our own? Lobbyist, corporate sponsership of our politicians thru campaign contributions (remainders of which BELONG to the candidate after that particular election) and free media coverage all for sake of buying access and influence are legalized by the scum taking the payoffs. Well, the drone attacks are having an effect, and the Pakistan army is starting to actually engage A-Q in the lawless area. Certainly hard to disagree with your point, however. |
#26
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:26:00 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: Afghanistan has very little to do with terrorism. There may be less than 100 al queda in Afghanistan and we are spending about 100 million dollars a year each to try to kill them. This is a stupid way to waste our grand kid's money at a time when the country is in so much fiscal trouble. I disagree. Locals are not turning in taliban. And the way taliban is used, it can encompass any radical islam organization. It isn't like there is just one. The Taliban is not al queda, although Washington would like us to think they are the same. Some in Washington. The adults don't think that nor promote that false notion. |
#27
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 10/07/2010 9:32 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 20:11:26 -0400, "Harold'" wrote: "Harry wrote in message ... ...it is out to **** us all...forever... General George Casey, the Chief of Staff of the Army, said today the United States could face another "decade or so" of persistent conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. In two months, the U.S. will have been at war in Afghanistan for nine years. - - - These whores will do anything to stay in uniform. Last time I checked O'Bama was the whore in charge. you pro terrorism? You can want our people out of there and not be pro-terrorism. So far this war is getting close to two times as long as WW II and no sight of peace. Which means we are not winning. And it is probably due to the fact that we in the west will not face up to what we are really fighting. We are not fighting an army but a cult of fascism and hate engrained right into families. If we can't extinguish the cult, the problem will persist. The enemy is islam itself. -- Government: We have Liberals (academic idealists), NDP (dreaming socialists) and Conservative (lawyer scum) but where is the middle class (common sense)? No. You're just a racist. |
#28
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 12:22:02 -0400, bpuharic wrote: So far this war is getting close to two times as long as WW II and no sight of peace. that's the nature of guerrilla insurrections. we don't have to 'win'. we just dont have to lose We did so well in Vietnam, what could possibly go wrong If you listen to the generals of that era, it was the politicians' fault for not letting them finish the job. |
#29
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Harold'" wrote in message ... "Harry ?" wrote in message m... On 7/11/10 8:46 AM, John H wrote: On Jul 10, 7:52 pm, Harry wrote: ...it is out to **** us all...forever... General George Casey, the Chief of Staff of the Army, said today the United States could face another "decade or so" of persistent conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. In two months, the U.S. will have been at war in Afghanistan for nine years. - - - These whores will do anything to stay in uniform. Harry, it's not August yet, but I'm going to give you an early reply to one of your posts. Your comment about General Casey's remarks was about the most stupid, ****ing thing you've said in years. Now I know some folks will argue about it was *really* the *most* stupid thing you've said, but they're wrong. It was. Generals do not keep wars going. Politicians keep wars going. Obama could have had us out of both Iraq and Afghanistan well over a year ago. *Obama* is making the choice of keeping us there. General Casey is noting that it could take another decade or so to accomplish what the friggin' politician, to wit: Obama, wants to accomplish. Since Obama has his head up his ass and doesn't have any idea of his goals over there, your grandchildren could well end up there. If things change in your family, you might even hear about it. Pray for a Republican president. She'll probably either **** or get off the pot with regard to Afghanistan. Remember the Iraq surge that 'wouldn't work' but did? OK, see you again in September...unless you do some *really* stupid again. Wow...herring thinks I give a damn whether he responds directly to one of my posts. That's some ego working over there in herringville. The posit is that the "officer corps" will do anything it can to stay in uniform, including prolonging war. Without a heavy-duty war to keep themselves busy, the officer corps will shrink, and so should the amount of dollars wasted on the "military-industrial" complex. The last presidents we had who knew anything real about "modern" war and the military from the highest levels were Eisenhower and to a lesser degree, George H.W. Bush. There is nothing worth accomplishing in Afghanistan. If Obama thinks otherwise, it is because his "military advisers" told him there was. The Iraqi surge merely postponed the inevitable. Iraq will fall apart once we pull out. Either that, or it will be ruled by a right-winger with close ties to some ayatollah. The military establishment will **** us over every time. If it didn't, half of its officers would be mustered out to become substitute teachers. According to an eye witness, Obama has very little interest in being advised on military affairs. Obama does what he damn well pleases. He gives the orders. He da man. He your man, Howard the coward. This according to a moron such as yourself. You da racist. |
#30
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:24:27 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 10/07/2010 9:32 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 20:11:26 -0400, "Harold'" wrote: - - - These whores will do anything to stay in uniform. Last time I checked O'Bama was the whore in charge. you pro terrorism? You can want our people out of there and not be pro-terrorism. So far this war is getting close to two times as long as WW II and no sight of peace. that's the nature of guerrilla insurrections. we don't have to 'win'. we just dont have to lose Far as I know, we've only won one insurgent war and that was when we were the insurgents. The only way to "win" this one is to declare a tie or call it a victory if we would rather continue to lie to ourselves (we stopped fooling the rest of the world a long time ago) and leave. The "win" will be stopping the loss of life for all and not having to finance a war we can't afford. This goes for Iraq as well. Which means we are not winning. neither are they And it is probably due to the fact that we in the west will not face up to what we are really fighting. We are not fighting an army but a cult of fascism and hate engrained right into families. If we can't extinguish the cult, the problem will persist. The enemy is islam itself. Probably exactly what is being preached about Christianity in radical Muslim gathering. Welcome to the ****ing dark ages. Funny how Christians forget about Christ's teachings and want to fall back on old testament psychotic crap that makes Sharia look progressive whenever Muslims are mentioned.. yep. islam is the most backwards of the world's major religions, with christianity not far behind |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Woman proves gun effective | General | |||
OT Michael Moore proves he is the sicko | ASA | |||
Google proves MacGregor 26 is flimsy | ASA | |||
Ellen proves the Good Captain Correct! | ASA |