|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 10, 2004 12:58:20 GMT -5
Um, it wasn't Bush that made the call, Vinny. It was Rumsfeld. And before you start criticizing Rumsfeld, know this: The same arguement was made prior to Afghanistan, but Rumsfeld used Special Forces units there in greater numbers and look at how that place turned out. So you see there was precedence for his decision.
Criticism of our government I don't mind seeing, hell I even encourage it as it it healthy. But blind criticism is annoying to say the least. Get some facts . I get tired of seeing you get blown out of the water. Just once I'd like to see you win a debate, just without resorting to insults.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 16, 2004 11:21:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by UncleVinny on Nov 22, 2004 12:03:09 GMT -5
Well, the 'great unraveling' is beginning.
NOW (weeks after the election) the military is finally admitting we need more troops over there - today's paper (Nov 22). Yawn! Told ya so!
Meanwhile, funny how all the apologists are coming out of the woodwork to defend the marine killing an innocent wounded person. All the crap you hear now about "fog of war" and booby trapped bodies.
Yeah, killing wounded people - go ahead, call it "spreading peace and democracy" if you want, but it's MURDER, plain and simple.
Mmm, maybe a brave soldier will come forward and yet again expose the attrocities of war, maybe run for the senate, then have some fellow soldiers call him a coward and a liar. Where have I seen that before?? ;D
To answer - Actually it was a colonel in Iraq who was claiming he could overthrow Saddam with 50,000 troops. Newt Gingrich found this fellow, brought him in to meet Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. They got the ear of the president. EVERY other military analyst way saying we need 400,000 troops. Finally Tommy Franks convinced Bush we could go in with just over 100,000, which we did. Sure, we toppled Saddam, but looters took over the country, stole munitions, no border security, no occupation forces: Result: a quagmire.
Dumb!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 22, 2004 12:08:28 GMT -5
I don't have much time so I'll make this quick. That innocent you're talking about was actually a sniper who had been shooting at our troops the day before. And he wasn't merely wounded and in the custody of the US military, he was feigning death, which in itself is against the laws of war. If someone is wounded yet pretends to be dead, I would think that it would be cause for speculation. Wounded, perhaps, innocent, you've got to be kidding. The reason the marine, who had just been shot in the face, shot the sniper was because they had run into several instances were our marines would go to move or bury the bodies and they would detonate. There were several of these events that took place just yards from this very incident.
Muslims as fighters are dogs. They use roadside bombs, they wave surrender flags and then blow hospitals up. They prey on the decency of our troops, and for you to get on here and critique this soldier's actions without putting his actions in context is the very pinnacle of the contemptible, shameful, sleazy tactics I have come to know liberals to use. I would label you a traitor, but after going through your posts I've had a rather difficult time of finding a single moment were an objective viewer could consider any of your writings even remotely American. The only difference between you and the hippies who spit on our troops as they came back from Vietnam is a computer screen. You embody the cancer that is eating this country alive, and until we do something about your kind, the future of this country remains very uncertain.
|
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Nov 22, 2004 16:34:59 GMT -5
Amen, Ian!!!
And Vinny,
Where was your outrage when innocent people were having their heads sawed off by the same kind of thugs that our brave marine killed.
Also, the cameraman who rolled that footage has a long history of being an anti-war hippie, and his life was probably saved by the marine who gave the eternal sand nap to that Islamic THUG.
|
|
|
|
Post by BOLO on Nov 22, 2004 19:42:00 GMT -5
Vinny is posting.
Vinny is lying.
Lie vinny Lie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 23, 2004 5:46:07 GMT -5
Seriously Vinny, if you have such a problem with how things are run in the military, why dont you join?
Its pretty easy to be critical of soldiers when you are safe in your own house watching things on TV. I havent seen the video in question, but let me tell you this. When you are being shot at you have to think quickly or you will die. You live by your wits and reflexes alone. Sometimes you are right and sometimes you are wrong, but as long as you are going to go home and spend the holidays with your family for the most part it doesnt matter.
I love how liberals are so ready to jump on our troops, all the while saying you support us. You dont support us, you hate us. Go to DU where your fellow commies will help you feed your delusions.
|
|
|
|
Post by scrap on Nov 23, 2004 20:51:37 GMT -5
[quote author=UncleVinny
Meanwhile, funny how all the apologists are coming out of the woodwork to defend the marine killing an innocent wounded person. All the crap you hear now about "fog of war" and booby trapped bodies.
Yeah, killing wounded people - go ahead, call it "spreading peace and democracy" if you want, but it's MURDER, plain and simple.
Mmm, maybe a brave soldier will come forward and yet again expose the attrocities of war, maybe run for the senate, then have some fellow soldiers call him a coward and a liar. Where have I seen that before?? ;D
Vinny you are a despicable little piece of crap on the a.. hole of America.
Did you ever spend any time in uniform defending your country.
No I didn't think so.
Your comments are beneath contempt.
You get to enjoy the freedoms this country allows you without contributing.
Yes it's your right to spout off but just for once in your miserable little life put yourself in the soldiers position.
Of course you won't because your sitting in your comfortable recliner without a clue as to what's going on over there.
You spout off with reckless abandon with no regard for the moral of the troops.
I hope you sleep well tonite and if you do... thank a member of the armed services for your comfort.
|
|
|
|
Post by UncleVinny on Nov 24, 2004 10:47:58 GMT -5
Thanks to all for the love and kindness you show here. Kisses.  All things balance out after a while, thank God. The pendulum swings. Now we are seeing the start of the unraveling of the war machine. USA Today reports recruiting is down this month, more than 30% below the goal for the Army National Guard. And it's down more than 12% for the year. Smart people do not want to go to war. I'm not saying the soldier was wrong to shoot the enemy. I'm saying the people who sent him there, put him in harms way, THEY were wrong. Sheesh, if the Canadian invaded America don't you think every able bodied American would resist them with force? Of course. So what are we doing in Iraq anyway? Can we blame them for wanting the American occupiers out? |
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 24, 2004 11:29:39 GMT -5
No problem Vinny, anytime.
Hmmm, that's not how I remembered it. Here's what you said:
You said nothing about the government, you said apologists for the MARINE.
I can think of a few posters on this board I'm not too sure about.
|
|
|
|
Post by scrap on Nov 24, 2004 14:28:25 GMT -5
It's just like our Vinny boy to start backpedaling.
There was no mistake about you calling the Marine a murderer.
Your not only despicable but your also a liar.
|
|
|
|
Post by BOLO on Nov 24, 2004 19:28:56 GMT -5
Gee.....I wish I'd said that.
Hey Vinny. You are not only a liar you are stupid.
Know why NG recruitment is down?
Cause Recruitment in the Regualr Army, Navy, Air Force, U.s. Marines, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine are
UP
Dip wad.
Nothings unraveling except that ball of yarn you think is your brain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Nov 24, 2004 20:00:49 GMT -5
Good point BOLO!
|
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 24, 2004 21:16:49 GMT -5
Well, the 'great unraveling' is beginning. NOW (weeks after the election) the military is finally admitting we need more troops over there - today's paper (Nov 22). Yawn! Told ya so! Meanwhile, funny how all the apologists are coming out of the woodwork to defend the marine killing an innocent wounded person. All the crap you hear now about "fog of war" and booby trapped bodies. Yeah, killing wounded people - go ahead, call it "spreading peace and democracy" if you want, but it's MURDER, plain and simple. Mmm, maybe a brave soldier will come forward and yet again expose the attrocities of war, maybe run for the senate, then have some fellow soldiers call him a coward and a liar. Where have I seen that before?? ;D To answer - Actually it was a colonel in Iraq who was claiming he could overthrow Saddam with 50,000 troops. Newt Gingrich found this fellow, brought him in to meet Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. They got the ear of the president. EVERY other military analyst way saying we need 400,000 troops. Finally Tommy Franks convinced Bush we could go in with just over 100,000, which we did. Sure, we toppled Saddam, but looters took over the country, stole munitions, no border security, no occupation forces: Result: a quagmire. Dumb! uncle vinnie I would realy enjoy protecting you ? I would have to turn away for a smoke break! |
|
|
|
Post by Edge on Nov 24, 2004 22:22:16 GMT -5
Bolo,
Although I agree that we're in good shape militarily I must disagree with your claim that recruitment for the armed forces is "UP". It's not up at all. The army in particular is so strained that, as you may or may not know, the Green Beret recently made available--for the first time in US history--the opportunity to enlist as a civilian (similar to the Navy Seals enlistment track). That means that our "Special Forces" are now getting dumbed-down to the man on the street for initial recruitment. Yes they get training. But they're not as experienced as the old school Beret of yesteryears, all of whom had at least five years of active duty prior to SF training. Why this change in recruitment policy? Because the regular army (which recruits civies) hasn't been getting enough fresh blood to succcessfully provide the Green Beret with enough advanced level personnel without straining itself. So now, the GB has to go out looking for novices.
Of course we can out-fight anyone for an extended period of time due to technology and, taking into account the losses of prior wars, the current engagement in Iraq is a minor skirmish really. At Gettysburg alone, over 50,000 people died in less than three days (1863).
|
|
