The war in Iraq

[findfirefox]

we're finally communicating.

okay enough ass sniffing jokes for this thread.

Arliss.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

don't say his name 3 times

 

[JustAsking]

One reason for the GOP's obligation to start a wars is because their largest campaign contributors are usually arms manufacturers. From Lockheed to Northrop, The GOP can guarantee these business a long, protracted war. If there is no country that poses an appreciable threat, then one of the following must be done:

1. Wag the dog and construct an invisible enemy. Reagan was incredibly proficient at this -- getting Americans to spend $1 trillion on the Star Wars project to protect America from Soviet ICBMs. This venture was bogus and didn't accomplish anything. It astounds me that Americans were gullible enough to pay for nothing but $3,000 toilet seats. Since the budget was top secret, we'll never know who really got rich; It certainly wasn't the American people.

... ...


..."The point is we have had a good battle plan, and it's a battle plan that will succeed." -- Colin L. Powell.

Rec,
A superb posting. I agree with all of it including the unfortunate duping of a fine American with many years of service, Colin Powell. They used him as the straight man in their conning of the American public and spit him out the other side.

I did have one thing to add about the StarWars project, though. I was never a Reagan fan, and I think he started one of the biggest divisions of culture in America in a long time.

As for SW, I am not sure if this was his idea, an idea from his staff, or neo-conservatism just getting lucky. But in my estimation, the StarWars project was one of the most successful military projects since the atomic bomb. Here is my logic:

First of all, the project was astonishgly ambitious. It required a number of technical innovations that did not yet exist at the time, and some of them may not even exist now. The probability of it working was pretty low if not zero. But the genius of the Reagan administration is the realization that "perception is reality". If you can get the general public to doubt science and engineering, you can also get them to expect things from it that are probably not possible.

So here is my version of the plan.

1. Define an ambitious space based defense system that will make the US completely invulnerable to attack by ICBM. If you accomplish this level of defense, you rule the world because the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction would be defunct.
2. Base the strategy on a series of necessary technical breakthroughs in a number of cutting edge areas that are very very ambitious. For example, massively parallel computing systems, languages and networks. Also, high powered laser technology, and radio communications.
3. Start funding all the major defense contractors for projects related to StarWars, and fund every little company that also wants to contribute. The trillion dollars is really not a problem, because it will all go back into the economy anyway and whether SW is successful or not, it will have funded advances in military technology that ordinarily would have not been developed for decades.
4. Foster endless academic and engineering debates at conferences and in the professional journals debating the various ways in which each breakthrough may or may not be established. Although you know that many of the breakthroughs won't be achieved, this step 4 is perhaps the most important part because if step 5.
5. Leak a lot of information about SW to the Russians and know that naturally they will be studying all the technical journals.
6. The Russians are now scared shitless because who would ever bet against the USA in areas like computer science, laser technology, and aerospace engineering. From all the activity in the journals and all the money being spent, the Russians will see a virtual tidal wave of activity that cannot be faked on such a large scale. Even if it looks iffy, the Russians cannot afford to gamble on the USA failing.
7. Even wiith a faltering economy, the Russians now start work on their own similar project, and since they have some confidence in their own engineering prowess, they just start spending and spending on it thinking that they should be able to catch up. Additionally, the Russians think they know something more about certain particle beam technologies, so they think they can do an SW their own way.
8. Ultimately, the Russians go broke never achieving anything that looks like it would work as an SW defense, all the while the furious development activity in the USA continues.
9. Russia's economy collapses, the Berlin Wall comes down, and the East Germans trade in their Skodas for Mercedes.
10. The US cancels the SW project and harvests the fruits of a trillion dollars of investment in computer, network, laser, and space technologies for the next 20 years.

By Jove, I think it just might work.

 

[midlifebear]

I disapproved of the Viet Nam "conflict" and have never supported the jingoist war mongers of either of the Bush Administrations. I do, however, support the men and women who are forced by stupid leadership to fight these useless wars. After all, it's not their fault. I don't know if the following link to todays NY Time's article works but it's worth a read. Anyone able to guess how many non-US Citizens have fought for the USA in the Army, Marines, Airforce, or Navy, lost their lives fighting for our country and then been refused citizenship? The numbers are not small.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/us/24vets.html?th&emc=th

 

[faceking]

If you hate Bush, the War etc...

please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war".

just don't.

 

[Skull Mason]

yeah fuck the troops and the war

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

I disapproved of the Viet Nam "conflict" and have never supported the jingoist war mongers of either of the Bush Administrations. I do, however, support the men and women who are forced by stupid leadership to fight these useless wars. After all, it's not their fault. I don't know if the following link to todays NY Time's article works but it's worth a read. Anyone able to guess how many non-US Citizens have fought for the USA in the Army, Marines, Airforce, or Navy, lost their lives fighting for our country and then been refused citizenship? The numbers are not small.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/us/24vets.html?th&emc=th

Many Canucks died, while fighting for the U.S., in Vietnam and Korea. Our government does not give them war benefits because we were not officially involved in either war

If you hate Bush, the War etc...

please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war".
just don't.

Don't start that sanctimonious bullshit. Why are you being such a jerk lately faceking? There is nothing wrong with wishing the troops health and safety while desiring an end of the war.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

Canada's involvement in the Vietnam War

I didn't know about any of that.

I do remember this, though:

YouTube - Ann Coulter on Canadian Troops in Vietnam

and seen Coulter slammed many times for it.

 

[B_NineInchCock_160IQ]

If you hate Bush, the War etc...

please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war".

just don't.

You support the troops by wishing them to stay in harm's way fighting a pointless war for their liar-in-cheif? Poorly equipped, recruited by deceitful and underhanded recruitment officers, with their tours routinely extended, stationed far from home, without adequate VA benefits when they finally get home (if they get home). Is that how you show your support for the troops?

Saying that because some, or even the majority, of troops stationed in Iraq believe in the cause or believe that they are doing the right thing is reason to leave them there indefinitely without good justification is completely asinine. It's not up to the troops to make policy. Supporting the policy makers who callously put our troops in harm's way has absolutely nothing to do with supporting the troops themselves. Nor does spouting patriotic garbage with no basis in reality or pinning a flag to your lapel. It's insulting to even insinuate that such were true.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

Canada's involvement in the Vietnam War

I didn't know about any of that.

I do remember this, though:

YouTube - Ann Coulter on Canadian Troops in Vietnam

and seen Coulter slammed many times for it.

Of course she'll answer anyway, because she feels a need to tell people not only what they should do, but also what they should think. She needs to learn when to keep that huge yap shut.

She's not a polemicist. She's just a bitch.

 

[JustAsking]

If you hate Bush, the War etc...

please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war".

just don't.

faceking,
You might be the only one I know who still confuses these two things. While the rest of us think it is shameful to send our troops into a senseless war, we do support their having the right equipment, having the proper command, having a real strategy, having decent care when they return wounded or emotionally damaged by war and not being on eternal extended stay, and not being stressed so thin that we could not possibly deal with one more conflict in the world.

We also support the troops by wanting them out of there as quickly as possible.

Please don't disrespect the troops by advocating that they continue to fight in a senseless war, and confuse that with "supporting the troops".

 

[midlifebear]

If you hate Bush, the War etc...

please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war".

just don't.

I damn fucking will say I support our military while not supporting the least intelligent president we've had in decades! And you are welcome to stick it where the sun don't shine if it bothers you so much, sonny! In fact, glad to hear it. It just exposes you as one of those typical stupid tools who somehow thinks they have cornered the market on patriotism? Hell, you're less than a tool. :biggrin1: You're as dumb as a mud fence. And you're welcome to take that personally.

 

[SteveHd]

If you hate Bush, the War etc... // please don't disrespect the soldiers with "I support the troops, but not the war". // just don't.

Yeah, it bothers me too. I think some of them mean well but they don't realize the contradiction.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

Yeah, it bothers me too. I think some of them mean well but they don't realize the contradiction.

Yeah, it sure is contrary to hope that the troops don't get blown up while wishing the government would stop the war. Maybe some day I'll become so stupid that I'll finally see the contradiction. Here's hoping! :beerchug2:


Conservative spin doctors are the most senseless creatures on earth.

 

[findfirefox]

Yeah, it bothers me too. I think some of them mean well but they don't realize the contradiction.

What contradiction?

I support the troops in their aspects of wellbeing and having the equipment they need. I don't support the continuation of a war I disagree with. I understand that many troops agree with the war, but thats a political difference and I still wish for their safety.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

I support the troops by affixing a small metallic sticker to my car that says so.

 

[findfirefox]

I support the troops by affixing a small metallic sticker to my car that says so.

heh. You can also put those little flags on your car.

 

[SteveHd]

Do words and decals really support the troops?

 

[findfirefox]

Do words and decals really support the troops?

I don't know, ask the people who have them. They appear to think so.

 

[JustAsking]

Cher supports the troops. What a disgrace when a singer from two decades ago has to fund proper helmutage for our troops and beg the public to help her.