On 9/3/2014 6:26 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 4:41 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 4:02 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 3:29 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 3:22 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 3:11 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 2:49 PM, KC wrote:
On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you
mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't worked so
far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the military
has
done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and
compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat
unique (I
think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my
adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a
civilian
career
that eventually included owning and running a small company
consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly
efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people
with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me.
Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special
privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I received
more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return during
the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures
are
more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went
in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed
the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal arts
grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld
(Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further
and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he
bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...



The anti-intellectualism expressed here by you righties is just
frippin'
hilarious. Human intel gathering is best done by humans with liberal
arts educations. Of course, few of you even know what a liberal arts
education encompasses. Hell, most of you righties can't even
follow a
thread without drifting way off course.

I was discussing our failures in human intel, *not* waving the flag
for
the wonderful accomplishments of military personnel. Bilious Bill as
usual cannot follow any conversation without tripping over it.
Fretwell
throws in neocons and their college majors, and, of course, the
newsgroup psychotic is off in outer space, as usual.

I'm not talking about photo interpretation, or about figuring out
what
scientific data means...I'm talking about using knowledge of
language,
history, personality analysis, cultural differences...the tools a
field
agent uses to gather human intel. You know, the kind of stuff that
indicates where Osama might have been hiding, or what was on his
mind,
or who he spoke with, or who he slept with, or what he liked to eat
for
dinner, or who he trusted...the sort of info you get via human
interaction, the sort of info you do not get by waterboarding, the
sort
of data you do get via effective practice of tradecraft.



this is funny as hell.


Yeah, we know you're the official military flag waver, and I've read
how boot camp was a wonderful experience for all you mustered out
oldsters. Yahoo.


Don't get your underwear in a bunch. Not everyone is cut out for
military service.

BTW ... "Boot Camp" is a very small part of a typical four year
contract, but it's one of the parts you never really forget. Bit of a
"culture shock". In later years it's fun to share experiences with
others who experienced it.

It's entirely understandable that you have no respect for the
experiences of others. You didn't do it, therefore it should have no
value for anyone. Correct?




Oh, please. I have plenty of respect for many of the experiences of
others, no matter what their field of endeavor, especially if they have
excelled at it in some significant way.

A couple of army intel officers I knew in Kansas City tried to get me to
sign up for some OCS program available at the time, but I had no
interest in doing anything to further the slaughter of SE Asians, and I
was even less interested in "the military." This was in the mid-1960s.


Ergo your criticism of those who, by choice or not, answered the call
and served. Got it.



My disdain for several of those here who "served" has nothing to do with
their military service.

This discussion is going nowhere. It's like trying to swat a fly with a
tennis racket.

On 9/3/14 7:22 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 6:26 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 4:41 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 4:02 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 3:29 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 3:22 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/3/2014 3:11 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 2:49 PM, KC wrote:
On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you
mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't
worked so
far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the
military
has
done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and
compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat
unique (I
think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my
adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a
civilian
career
that eventually included owning and running a small company
consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly
efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people
with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me.
Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special
privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I
received
more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return
during
the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures
are
more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went
in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed
the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal
arts
grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld
(Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further
and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he
bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...



The anti-intellectualism expressed here by you righties is just
frippin'
hilarious. Human intel gathering is best done by humans with
liberal
arts educations. Of course, few of you even know what a liberal
arts
education encompasses. Hell, most of you righties can't even
follow a
thread without drifting way off course.

I was discussing our failures in human intel, *not* waving the flag
for
the wonderful accomplishments of military personnel. Bilious
Bill as
usual cannot follow any conversation without tripping over it.
Fretwell
throws in neocons and their college majors, and, of course, the
newsgroup psychotic is off in outer space, as usual.

I'm not talking about photo interpretation, or about figuring out
what
scientific data means...I'm talking about using knowledge of
language,
history, personality analysis, cultural differences...the tools a
field
agent uses to gather human intel. You know, the kind of stuff that
indicates where Osama might have been hiding, or what was on his
mind,
or who he spoke with, or who he slept with, or what he liked to eat
for
dinner, or who he trusted...the sort of info you get via human
interaction, the sort of info you do not get by waterboarding, the
sort
of data you do get via effective practice of tradecraft.



this is funny as hell.


Yeah, we know you're the official military flag waver, and I've read
how boot camp was a wonderful experience for all you mustered out
oldsters. Yahoo.


Don't get your underwear in a bunch. Not everyone is cut out for
military service.

BTW ... "Boot Camp" is a very small part of a typical four year
contract, but it's one of the parts you never really forget. Bit of a
"culture shock". In later years it's fun to share experiences with
others who experienced it.

It's entirely understandable that you have no respect for the
experiences of others. You didn't do it, therefore it should have no
value for anyone. Correct?




Oh, please. I have plenty of respect for many of the experiences of
others, no matter what their field of endeavor, especially if they have
excelled at it in some significant way.

A couple of army intel officers I knew in Kansas City tried to get
me to
sign up for some OCS program available at the time, but I had no
interest in doing anything to further the slaughter of SE Asians, and I
was even less interested in "the military." This was in the mid-1960s.


Ergo your criticism of those who, by choice or not, answered the call
and served. Got it.



My disdain for several of those here who "served" has nothing to do with
their military service.

This discussion is going nowhere. It's like trying to swat a fly with a
tennis racket.





Most discussions in this newsgroup go nowhere. Why should this one be
different?

On 9/4/2014 1:58 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 16:06:38 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


So? Who are we going to fight? The Russians? The Chinese? Qatar?

I guess the question is what would be worth fighting over? Would we
come to the aid of Japan? Taiwan? Ukraine?


Japan, Taiwan and Ukraine are not members of NATO, so that alliance
doesn't apply.

Japan and the USA have a security treaty in which the USA pledges to
defend Japan against communist aggression.

A treaty (Sino-American Mutual Defense) afforded Taiwan protection
against a Chinese attack but it was cancelled by Jimmy Carter in 1979.

Ukraine had an opportunity to join NATO but didn't. I think they are
re-thinking that.

I think the only way the USA would become actively involved in a major
way would be in the case of an attack on a NATO member.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 14:23:19 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


I just think the psychological effect of drones is the opposite of
what we want.

It has a tremendous effect on morale. "Caliphate" is a joke.
These criminals can't build a palace. All they can do is hide.
The U.S. has put a target on their backs. And rightly so.

How has that morale thing been working out?
There are far more insurgents now than there were 10 years ago.
You already established that these are just thugs and there seems to
be no shortage of replacements.
It is like stepping on ants and thinking you are controlling them.


We'll see when leaders get vaporized by Hellfires or laser guided bombs.
It worked well against Al Queda.
Of course this gang replaced them.
And we'll also find out if Arab Muslims can handle democracy well enough
to control the radical, bloodthirty criminals among them.
I have my doubts.

We act like there is some kind of Yamamoto out there that will
seriously degrade their capability if we kill him.

Yamamoto had a target on his back.
The mission to kill him wasn't called "Operation Disrupt Japanese Hight
Command". He was already pretty much irrelevant.
It was named "Operation Vengeance"

So you admit these strikes are just reprisals, not any real
decapitation.


No. The strikes enabled a coalition of Iraqis and Kurds to retake
Mosul dam and Tikrit.
Strikes against leaders are in the offing.
The leaders will hide deep - using your ant analogy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-XidMcwKAI
And like ants, you don't totally wipe out criminals, you control them.
I have poisoned ant infestations to control them.


The reality is the knowledge is pretty freely disseminated among the
gangs and there is no one single leader or mechanic who is key to the
operation. We only make martyrs. When we take out a bunch of
innocents, it is just a recruiting tool. I suppose we can just kill
them all but there is over a billion of them world wide


Leaders keep the gang together and set the "strategy".
ISIS could lay down their arms now, and the beheader and leaders
are still dead men. That's what vengeance is about.
I have no problem with that.

No I don't have a good answer but neither does our government.

There is no "military answer" except to kill them.
Vengeance.
Of course some might want them tried first, but not me.

Yeah, it feels good stepping on ants too, but you are not seriously
decreasing their population.

I don't feel good stepping on ants, and avoid it. Life is precious.
But if they start making big lumps in my lawn, they've chosen their
sad fate. Vengeance is reserved for killers.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:24:19 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Any idea how many innocent Iraqis, Syrians and who knows who else have
been slaughtered so far by ISIS? I don't know what the estimated total
is but it's a pretty large number. There are unconfirmed reports of
killing off children simply because they had Christian parents. The
"rapper" isn't doing all the killing by himself.

Here's one account of Iraq civilian casualties.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/18/iraqi-civilian-death-toll-5500-2014-isis

Of course I don't know what's considered "civilian" over there.
War is pretty "natural" to Arab Muslims.
They don't need guns - stones will do.
I wonder if you did a poll over there about whether stoning to death for
adultery, dressing out of "code," etc, what the results would be.

Careful now
I suppose someone might start pointing out how many Iraqi civilians
the US killed in the 18 years of war there.

Not nearly as many by direct US military action as by them cutting each
others throats.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 14:52:41 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


If you are intent on counting bodies, let's not forget the upwards of
500,000 Iraqis, mostly non-combatants, killed during the Bush-Cheney war
against Iraq. Oh, wait, the hundreds of thousands we killed aren't
nearly as dead as the ones ISIS has killed...right?

Don't stop there. You have to include the ones killed in Bush
1/Clinton's war in Iraq too.

... Unless you are like BAO and don't think bombs and missiles kill
people.

Don't put false words in my mouth, radical Muslim lover.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:37:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:


Not nearly as many by direct US military action as by them cutting each
others throats.

Bombing and missile attacks are not "direct military actions"?

Are you kidding? The Arabs have killed far more with mosque bombings
and suicide bombers in marketplaces than all the bomb and missile
attacks by Americans. Jesus, you're a fan of criminals.

On 9/4/14 5:47 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:37:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:


Not nearly as many by direct US military action as by them cutting each
others throats.

Bombing and missile attacks are not "direct military actions"?

Are you kidding? The Arabs have killed far more with mosque bombings
and suicide bombers in marketplaces than all the bomb and missile
attacks by Americans. Jesus, you're a fan of criminals.



The reality is, Fretwell appears to be an apologist for the
anti-Israelis. I think the radical Muslims who are waging war against
Israel and other civilians in Iraq and Syria are pigs, but I have no
idea how to eradicate them. They're like roaches...kill some and plenty
more pop up.

In article , says...

On 9/4/14 5:47 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:37:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:


Not nearly as many by direct US military action as by them cutting each
others throats.

Bombing and missile attacks are not "direct military actions"?

Are you kidding? The Arabs have killed far more with mosque bombings
and suicide bombers in marketplaces than all the bomb and missile
attacks by Americans. Jesus, you're a fan of criminals.



The reality is, Fretwell appears to be an apologist for the
anti-Israelis. I think the radical Muslims who are waging war against
Israel and other civilians in Iraq and Syria are pigs, but I have no
idea how to eradicate them. They're like roaches...kill some and plenty
more pop up.

Of course you can't eradicate vermin. You know what they say about
roaches. But you can "manage" them.
Greg is a loonitarian. You know, that element which rails against
others having power and running the show. Hardly pragmatic.
'Nuff said.

On 9/4/14 7:03 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:53:42 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/4/14 5:47 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:37:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:


Not nearly as many by direct US military action as by them cutting each
others throats.

Bombing and missile attacks are not "direct military actions"?

Are you kidding? The Arabs have killed far more with mosque bombings
and suicide bombers in marketplaces than all the bomb and missile
attacks by Americans. Jesus, you're a fan of criminals.



The reality is, Fretwell appears to be an apologist for the
anti-Israelis. I think the radical Muslims who are waging war against
Israel and other civilians in Iraq and Syria are pigs, but I have no
idea how to eradicate them. They're like roaches...kill some and plenty
more pop up.


Sounds pretty racist to me.


"Muslim" ain't a race.