More Troops???!!

[lemonjello]

Lots of "truthiness".

Also it might have been a signal thru the media to all interested parties. A well timed leak - denied. Was it real or not?

Interesting about the Patriot battalion. I mentioned in the skullduggery thread that there are rumors of an Admiral - a naval weapons specialist, and four carrier groups (only two mentioned in the news) steaming to/around the area.

Hopefully, this is for pressure only.

I'm surprised the price of oil isn't blasting off.

Oh I forgot to mention this in case you missed it.

Last weekend, the Sunday Times of London reported that Israel is preparing a strike on the Iranian nuclear program at several bases scattered throughout the country. The paper claimed that the attack would be carried out with tactical nuclear “bunker busters’’ supplied by the United States. Israel quickly denied the report. But the story, which may be wrong in its details, has a certain truthiness. Israel is certainly thinking about how to stop Tehran from getting its hands on nukes.

[New-born baby]

Don't forget. we're also fighting Iran, somebody that has been at war with us since that Whiz bang president Jimmah Carter didn't do crap about our hostages. Not to mention that Iran is behind Hezbollah<sp> that killed how many hundred of our Marines in Beruit? It is long past time for an Iranian Smackdown. Iran knows that they are under threat with our thousands of troops and Land Air bases that won't require any muddled negotiations to use to bomb them.

for the multi-culti PC crowd here, of which there seem to be quite a few.

In their culture if you pull your arm back to take a swing and you don't they look at you as weak. Sadam, hung all of his hopes on our Viet Nam experience in that we wouldn't do anything about his Kuwait invasion. Then he hung on that when we stopped Desert Storm. and let him be with numerous conditions. Conditions which he didn't meet. WHICH was reason enough to blast him. (the WMD was a nonissue) See first sentence above. You can't keep telling a dog NO, and never punishing the dog. All you'll have at the end of the day is a carpet covered in Crap.

This is about resolve and a test of wills. we have to show that we're going to go to the mat on this. The dog must be punished.

Also, how was WWII ended? lots of talking or serious asskicking? I"m just wondering what history books some of you people have read?

There is no disagreement that cannot be solved by force it talking won't work. Just listen to what Iran and Moqtada Al Sadr say. They are crapping on the carpet and it is time for them to be punished.

OH, and for the bumblers out there that want to say this is a religious thing, not at all like Japan and Germany. Well the Emperor<sp, dang that doesn't look right) was worshipped as a God. so the Japanese soldiers were every bit as whipped up religiously as the modern day islamic jihadi. Two Nuclear weapons, not talking, ended that.


Lastly, someplace I have a clipping that shows ALL of the people that were getting Oil-for_food bribes. The list is by country. care to venture a guess at which countries were on the take from Sadam?

student

Except for a few expletives, this post was right on the money.

[lemonjello]

Care to share how many wars you've served in and what capacity? Thanks in advance.

Lemonjello

Don't forget. we're also fighting Iran, somebody that has been at war with us since that Whiz bang president Jimmah Carter didn't do crap about our hostages. Not to mention that Iran is behind Hezbollah<sp> that killed how many hundred of our Marines in Beruit? It is long past time for an Iranian Smackdown. Iran knows that they are under threat with our thousands of troops and Land Air bases that won't require any muddled negotiations to use to bomb them.

for the multi-culti PC crowd here, of which there seem to be quite a few.

In their culture if you pull your arm back to take a swing and you don't they look at you as weak. Sadam, hung all of his hopes on our Viet Nam experience in that we wouldn't do anything about his Kuwait invasion. Then he hung on that when we stopped Desert Storm. and let him be with numerous conditions. Conditions which he didn't meet. WHICH was reason enough to blast him. (the WMD was a nonissue) See first sentence above. You can't keep telling a dog NO, and never punishing the dog. All you'll have at the end of the day is a carpet covered in Crap.

This is about resolve and a test of wills. we have to show that we're going to go to the mat on this. The dog must be punished.

Also, how was WWII ended? lots of talking or serious asskicking? I"m just wondering what history books some of you people have read?

There is no disagreement that cannot be solved by force it talking won't work. Just listen to what Iran and Moqtada Al Sadr say. They are crapping on the carpet and it is time for them to be punished.

OH, and for the bumblers out there that want to say this is a religious thing, not at all like Japan and Germany. Well the Emperor<sp, dang that doesn't look right) was worshipped as a God. so the Japanese soldiers were every bit as whipped up religiously as the modern day islamic jihadi. Two Nuclear weapons, not talking, ended that.


Lastly, someplace I have a clipping that shows ALL of the people that were getting Oil-for_food bribes. The list is by country. care to venture a guess at which countries were on the take from Sadam?

student

[jiesen]

...

I'm surprised the price of oil isn't blasting off.

Oh, it will. Just give it some time.

[Tatnic]

Pretty effective strategy. What's the best way to stop eating? I've heard about some who had a chain wrapped right through their mouth. They could drink, but talking and eating were completely out.

there was some guy up in the hinterlands of Maine that chained himself to a tree to stop eating....and also in his neck of the woods, there was another guy that married a dog. Same dna most likely.

[Tatnic]

Oh I forgot to mention this in case you missed it.

Last weekend, the Sunday Times of London reported that Israel is preparing a strike on the Iranian nuclear program at several bases scattered throughout the country. The paper claimed that the attack would be carried out with tactical nuclear “bunker busters’’ supplied by the United States. Israel quickly denied the report. But the story, which may be wrong in its details, has a certain truthiness. Israel is certainly thinking about how to stop Tehran from getting its hands on nukes.

Israel would rather we take care of Iran, but if backed into a corner I'm guessing they'd take defensive actions. I don't believe that they need to borrow any nukes from us, they have their own...I seem to remember reading that they have several hundred. Whether or not they're "bunker busters", I don't know and not sure that would matter. Maybe the Times meant a regular bunker buster (not nuclear) that could penetrate and destroy underground facilities? Anyway, you can bet your bippie that Israel will not let Iran get too far along in their research, because any third grader knows that Iran is out to annihilated Israel.

The path of least resistance is world war 3. Are all you arm chair warriors ready to send your boys and girls into battle while you sit at home and watch it on your TV? Its human nature to go to war, and its human nature to do so in the name of "God". With all the killing and maiming that have gone on since the dawn of time in the name of "God", one might get the impression that God is really the devil in disguise? God was created by man, not the other way around, and man made God the devil.

[Runner]

Israel would rather we take care of Iran, but if backed into a corner I'm guessing they'd take defensive actions. I don't believe that they need to borrow any nukes from us, they have their own...I seem to remember reading that they have several hundred. Whether or not they're "bunker busters", I don't know and not sure that would matter. Maybe the Times meant a regular bunker buster (not nuclear) that could penetrate and destroy underground facilities? Anyway, you can bet your bippie that Israel will not let Iran get too far along in their research, because any third grader knows that Iran is out to annihilated Israel.

The path of least resistance is world war 3. Are all you arm chair warriors ready to send your boys and girls into battle while you sit at home and watch it on your TV? Its human nature to go to war, and its human nature to do so in the name of "God". With all the killing and maiming that have gone on since the dawn of time in the name of "God", one might get the impression that God is really the devil in disguise? God was created by man, not the other way around, and man made God the devil.

Do you not think the Freedoms of this country are in jeopardy? Do you not think Iran will expand dominance in the Middle East? As for armchair generals I simply executed my missions and I expect many kids today will do the same. You see the mission is to live for another day and do what needs to be done.. Does this require killings? Yes but we thought of it as putting them to sleep. IMO the future of youths does not look bright. I also think we are in the beginning stages of WW3…

Maybe we could sit down and talk things over peacefully.. Or do like many other countries just don’t get involved. After all they will only blackmail us.. How about this way of thinking, If we simply leave the terrorists alone they will leave us alone.. I bet most Americans think this… What a grave mistake IMO>>>

I’m done with this discussion and last thing I think you will see the draft come into play in years ahead. We will be in this current war on terror for the rest of time

[mrmarket]

Do you not think the Freedoms of this country are in jeopardy? Do you not think Iran will expand dominance in the Middle East? As for armchair generals I simply executed my missions and I expect many kids today will do the same. You see the mission is to live for another day and do what needs to be done.. Does this require killings? Yes but we thought of it as putting them to sleep. IMO the future of youths does not look bright. I also think we are in the beginning stages of WW3…

Maybe we could sit down and talk things over peacefully.. Or do like many other countries just don’t get involved. After all they will only blackmail us.. How about this way of thinking, If we simply leave the terrorists alone they will leave us alone.. I bet most Americans think this… What a grave mistake IMO>>>

I’m done with this discussion and last thing I think you will see the draft come into play in years ahead. We will be in this current war on terror for the rest of time

I doubt that they would ever put in the draft for many reasons:

#1. It is political suicide.
#2. Troops at war involuntarily never will really buy into the program and will be disobedient, insubordinate and dangerous.


Having said that, the draft is fair. Our armed forces are overrepresented by the American poor. Having a draft would mean that all Americans would have to be called to serve. I wonder if the twins Barbara and Jenna Bush were ever asked to serve?

If they ever instituted the draft for a war like this, I would move to Canada with my kids. However, in the unlikely event we were ever invaded I would stand and fight for my country and have my sons do the same. There is a very important difference between what is going on in Iraq and actually defending your country.

[Runner]

I doubt that they would ever put in the draft for many reasons:

#1. It is political suicide.
#2. Troops at war involuntarily never will really buy into the program and will be disobedient, insubordinate and dangerous.


Having said that, the draft is fair. Our armed forces are overrepresented by the American poor. Having a draft would mean that all Americans would have to be called to serve. I wonder if the twins Barbara and Jenna Bush were ever asked to serve?

If they ever instituted the draft for a war like this, I would move to Canada with my kids. However, in the unlikely event we were ever invaded I would stand and fight for my country and have my sons do the same. There is a very important difference between what is going on in Iraq and actually defending your country.

MM, your incorrect by assuming we have a poor mans Military.

On the socioeconomic side, the military is strongly middle class. More recruits are drawn from the middle class and fewer are coming from poorer and wealthier families. Recruits from poorer families are actually underrepresented in the military.
Other trends are that the number of recruits from wealthier families is increasing, and the number of recruits from suburban areas has increased. This also tracks that young men and women from the middle class are serving in the military.
Young men and women from urban areas are not volunteering. In fact, urban areas provide far fewer recruits as a percentage of the total population than small towns and rural areas.

[Runner]

We have written a lot on "This is Rumor Control" about recent US military recruitment and retention failures, but admittedly have not delved into solutions to the problem. If the Army is going to sustain the current engagement in Iraq and be prepared to respond to other unforeseen (not really that unforeseen) crises in, say, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Iran, this is a problem it must solve. If nothing is done to fix the problems of the all-volunteer military, reinstituting the draft could become the only solution. So what do we do? http://www.thisisrumorcontrol.org/node/2043

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/10/washington/10army.html?ex=1302321600&en=cc81835224264ae3&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[skiracer]

We have written a lot on "This is Rumor Control" about recent US military recruitment and retention failures, but admittedly have not delved into solutions to the problem. If the Army is going to sustain the current engagement in Iraq and be prepared to respond to other unforeseen (not really that unforeseen) crises in, say, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Iran, this is a problem it must solve. If nothing is done to fix the problems of the all-volunteer military, reinstituting the draft could become the only solution. So what do we do? http://www.thisisrumorcontrol.org/node/2043
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/10/wa...rssnyt&emc=rss

Runner,
Excellent site. I just added it to my favorites list. Lots of good stuff leading off of it too. Thanks. This thread is only going to end up pissing you off.

[Tatnic]

[QUOTE=Runner;76485]Do you not think the Freedoms of this country are in jeopardy? Do you not think Iran will expand dominance in the Middle East? As for armchair generals I simply executed my missions and I expect many kids today will do the same. You see the mission is to live for another day and do what needs to be done.. Does this require killings? Yes but we thought of it as putting them to sleep. IMO the future of youths does not look bright. I also think we are in the beginning stages of WW3…

Maybe we could sit down and talk things over peacefully.. Or do like many other countries just don’t get involved. After all they will only blackmail us.. How about this way of thinking, If we simply leave the terrorists alone they will leave us alone.. I bet most Americans think this… What a grave mistake IMO>>>

do I think the freedoms of this country are in jeopardy? Yes, but not by some sandcrab from the middle east. I worry more about cheney et al and their reign of power. Is iran a trouble maker? You betcha...andthey should be punished. I think a couple of nukes on tehran would do the trick adn the rest of the whackos would know that we're even more whacko.

****em and kill em all, women, children, cats and dogs. Incinerate em, backfill em into trenches an d plant some nice grass over them.

[ParkTwain]

Studentofthemarket wrote:

Don't forget. we're also fighting Iran, somebody that has been at war with us since that Whiz bang president Jimmah Carter didn't do crap about our hostages. Not to mention that Iran is behind Hezbollah<sp> that killed how many hundred of our Marines in Beruit? It is long past time for an Iranian Smackdown. Iran knows that they are under threat with our thousands of troops and Land Air bases that won't require any muddled negotiations to use to bomb them.


I guess student doesn't remember why the populace of Iran might have a bone to pick with the U.S. way before Carter was president. Do you remember the career of the Shah of Iran? Do you remember the U.S. policy of "containment" of the Soviet Union, which led us to shove down the throat of practically every nation that bordered the S.U. whatever missile systems and eavesdropping equipment we wanted to install? Do you remember when both the Soviets and the U.S. treated every other non-nuclear nation in the world as a pawn whose sovereignty was "necessarily" subject to Cold War aims? You think that a nation whose governmental leader was "installed" by a foreign power (and where that foreign power had a completely different cultural and religious establishment), as Iran's was, would simply FORGET this part of their own recent history?


Runner wrote:

If the Army is going to sustain the current engagement in Iraq and be prepared to respond to other unforeseen (not really that unforeseen) crises in, say, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Iran, this is a problem it must solve.


I realize that Runner is in some fashion a participant in the U.S. military, but I find this stridently militaristic mindset in U.S. foreign policy to be absolutely self-destructive of the future of the "American way of life." The fact that the U.S. military might believe that it is their job to deal with "crises" in N. Korea, Pakistan, Egypt, etc. into the foreseeable future is wildly out of synch with U.S. domestic economic and political reality. I believe that the U.S. military and the U.S. multinational corporations have established a symbiotic relationship that has almost totally subordinated all other foreign policy considerations, especially when a G.O.P president is in power. The U.S. military needs a mission, so the protection of Exxon's worldwide oil exploration activities gives them a mission. Only 25 percent of the territory of Iraq has been explored for oil, so ensuring a political and security environment that allows that exploration to take place in the near future also gives the U.S. military a mission. Etc. Etc. For instance, it is absolutely nuts for the U.S. right wing to believe that the Chinese are going to continue to buy U.S. Treasury bonds while those bonds are enabling the continuation of U.S. military hegemony in areas of the world whose resources would support Chinese economic expansion. (This is why the U.S. was drawn into WW2 with Japan.) At some point the Chinese will stop buying U.S. Treasuries, and the U.S. president and the Congress will have to make the tough decision about whether to scale back the U.S. military's geographic scope of operations and what will continue to be the "strategic areas of concern" around the world.

[ParkTwain]

Iraq and Palestine

Isn't it interesting that the U.S. has been willing to commit its military to defeating, occupying, and politically retooling a Middle Eastern nation the size of California (namely Iraq), while also spending almost one half TRILLION dollars, but cannot muster the will to deal with the political and military stalemate having to do with another Middle East homeland the size of Connecticut (namely, the West Bank). This is the hypocrisy about the U.S. relationship with Israel that the rest of the world sees quite clearly every day of the year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/arabs_iraq

//
Bush announced on Wednesday his decision to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq to try to stabilize the country and warned Arab nations against a surge in extremism in the region should the U.S. fail. He called on Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the Persian Gulf states to increase their support for Iraq's fledgling government.

Arab officials say leaders of the region's heavily Sunni Muslim nations aren't eager to help the Iraqi government, which is dominated by Shiite Muslims and deemed too close to the hardline Shiite regime in
Iran.

But these Sunni leaders also appear terrified at the prospect of a U.S. withdrawal, which they worry will lead to all-out civil war in Iraq.

"Unity of Iraq is necessary. Independence of Iraq is necessary, and peace in Iraq is necessary," said Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal.
//


Gee, maybe the new "surge" in U.S. troops into Iraq is basically to aid the Sunni block in Iraq, to allow them that much more time to get their political and, unfortuately, their MILITIA (backed by the Saudi regime), acts together. Perhaps the Saudis believe that, because U.S. forces will be withdrawing in bulk SOMETIME in the next 18 months, the game for Iraq's Sunnis is to be given as much time by the Americans as possible to prepare themselves for whatever will come next, which is most likely a civil war that partitions the southern two-thirds of Iraq into sectarian-dominated provinces. This outcome is at least partially acceptable to the Saudis, who, of course, would prefer a unified Iraq, but one in which there is not TOO much Iran domination. That is, the Saudis would probably want at the least a Sunni-dominated western-southwestern region of the present Iraq to serve as a territorial buffer between itself and the Sunni-dominated (i.e., Iran-dominated) portion of present-day Iraq.

The Sunnis are in the situation of the Serbs and Croats in Yugoslavia after the Cold War, who anticipated the withdrawal of the Soviet Army from Eastern Europe, quietly armed themselves, then initiated various fronts of ethnic cleansing across the former Yugoslavia when the time was right in order to draw new de facto national boundaries. However, the Sunnis have initiated a "war" with the Shia majority even before the Americans have withdrawn. Also complicating that situation to date: any Al Qaeda that are/were in Iraq were operating north and west of Baghdad and were fighting on the side of the Sunnis.

The following "behind the lines" article out of Iraq somewhat confirms at least some of what I say above:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1989397,00.html

[Lyehopper]

Park, You gotta get some sleep dude.... The satisfaction you derive from defending the theory of evolution, and trashing middle east politics really ain't worth your health....