Discussion:
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(too old to reply)
g***@hotmail.com
2007-09-16 05:14:25 UTC
Permalink
When are the soldiers coming home ?

Gen. BetrayUS, CFR stooge ! Agent for the Elite Robber Oil Barons.


Will spin doctor our troops till they won't know if they are coming or
going !


We will call our sons back home, we all have a fight in America to
take care of !!!


It's NOT a WAR on TERROR ! It's a WAR for OIL !


Sons of Liberty Militia
Tim Stine
312 S. Wyomissing Ave.
Shillington, Pa. 19607 U.S.A.
610-775-0497
***@hotmail.com
***@verizon.net

There will be [NO] World Government !
By consent, or by conquest.

9/11 Was a Covert Military Operation! On orders of the Elite Robber
Oil Barons & Bankster Families to get the American Sheeple behind a
war to mug Iraq for it's oil.

It's NOT a WAR on TERROR ! It's a WAR for OIL !

We have been [BushWhacked] Pass it on.

Sometimes the TRUTH is stranger then fiction.

Believe it or not!
We are not asking you to believe US!
But we dare you to prove US wrong!

Deception is King, Reality is scoffed at !!!

Help Stop the Elite Sponsored Terrorism.

TerrorStorm: Video !!!
It's not Al-Qa'ida we need to keep our eyes on.

http://tinyurl.com/28omuu

Freedom to Fascism: Video !!!

http://tinyurl.com/3yn6bs

Protect your Families. Form Militia's !
9/11 Justice: Video !!!

http://tinyurl.com/yo2t5n

TAX POOR AMERICA !!!

http://tinyurl.com/36uax3 Scroll-Down

The Pentagon Germ = AIDS !
Real World:

http://tinyurl.com/394j2h



WE MUST RESIST TYRANNY !!!


The revolution has started !!!
It's time to start over.

Listen to Alex Jones @ http://www.infowars.com/index.html
Red box to your right Infowars Main Stream.
redc1c4
2007-09-16 07:26:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)

when the mission is done.

redc1c4,
(or when you decide to quit and run....... pick one. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-16 15:27:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
redc1c4,
(or when you decide to quit and run....... pick one. %-)
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
Colin Campbell
2007-09-16 23:22:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
redc1c4,
(or when you decide to quit and run....... pick one. %-)
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.

At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.




--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-17 00:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
redc1c4,
(or when you decide to quit and run....... pick one. %-)
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
Ace
2007-09-17 05:42:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
redc1c4,
(or when you decide to quit and run....... pick one. %-)
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
1. Ensure Iraq's weapons of mass destruction cannot be used to harm
the United States or any of its allies.

2. Erm....

3. Err....

4. Um...

5. Well - it's got the second largest proven reserves of oil in the
World, so having control of that won't do any harm, but please don't
tell anyone else about that, and if asked, we'll deny the war has
anything to do with oil and simply say that Saddam Hussain was an evil
git and the World is a better place now he's dead.
Colin Campbell
2007-09-18 01:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
Did you read what I said?

Before you ask me to explain something that you should already know -
tell me why explaining it yet again will do any good whatsoever?


You do not know because you do not want to know - how will my
explaining change that fact?



--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-18 03:01:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
Did you read what I said?
I didn't read what you didn't write.
Post by Colin Campbell
Before you ask me to explain something that you should already know -
tell me why explaining it yet again will do any good whatsoever?
You can't explain again an opinion you hadn't offered in the first place.
Post by Colin Campbell
You do not know because you do not want to know - how will my
explaining change that fact?
Do you know what a tautology is?
Colin Campbell
2007-09-19 01:12:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
Did you read what I said?
I didn't read what you didn't write.
A little advice for you - if you are going to claim I di8dn't write
something, don't quote it in your post.

All this does is really make you look look an idiot. (Which possibly
produces another reason you are unaware of why we are in Iraq.)


--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-19 03:39:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
I'm up for a laff. Tell us what you think the goals are for Iraq.
Did you read what I said?
I didn't read what you didn't write.
A little advice for you - if you are going to claim I di8dn't write
something, don't quote it in your post.
I didn't quote you stating the reason for the war, just your constant
bitching that everyone should know why we are at war.
Post by Colin Campbell
All this does is really make you look look an idiot. (Which possibly
produces another reason you are unaware of why we are in Iraq.)
I've concluded that you have your head in the sand, despite what you are
claiming about everyone else. You have yet to make an explicit statement
spelling out your opinion, as requested numerous times.

You either have no opinion or are ashamed of it. But I no longer care.
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-17 03:37:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
Our goals are encapsulated in the name of the mission: Operation Iraqi
Freedom. It was our goal to free the Iraqi people from Sadda Hussein.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Gary L. Burnore
2007-09-17 22:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
If you do not know what they are by this time - any explanations will
be nothing more than wasted electrons.
At this point your ignorance can only be described as: deliberate.
Our goals are encapsulated in the name of the mission: Operation Iraqi
Freedom. It was our goal to free the Iraqi people from Sadda Hussein.
No, it wasn't. The alleged goal was to stop sadam from acquiring
nukes. THat changed when bush got caught in another lie.
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-20 10:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
We are fighting a proxy war with Iran. We need to defeat Iran.
We are fighting Al Quaeda. We need to defeat terrorism worldwide.
We are saving the Iraqi people from a despot. They yearn for Democracy.
We need to instill a western style democracy in Iraq, and then let it take
root, and help it spread far and wide across the entire mideast.

This might take a while. But don't worry, we're making progress.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Ace
2007-09-20 17:41:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by Adam H. Kerman
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
We are fighting a proxy war with Iran. We need to defeat Iran.
Misguided. At the start of the Second Oil War it was widely believed
that a puppet democratic government could be installed in Iraq in
place of the Saddam dictatorship. Other non-democratic countries in
the locality would see the advantages of democracy and follow the Iraq
model. This was a hopeless dream.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We are fighting Al Quaeda. We need to defeat terrorism worldwide.
Then invading Iraq was the worst thing to do. Prior to the start of
the Second Oil War there was no evidence of a functional Al Quaeda
command in Iraq. Saddam kept any dissent from terrorists well in
check. Following the near anarchy under US administration, Iraq has
fallen easy prey to Al Quaeda terrorists.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We are saving the Iraqi people from a despot. They yearn for Democracy.
The first part is correct; the second part is false. It is incorrect
to assume that Democracy is the only model of government that people
want. What people want is good governance. Good leaders,
undemocratically elected can and do provide good governance. Likewise,
democratically elected leaders can be abysmal.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We need to instill a western style democracy in Iraq, and then let it take
root, and help it spread far and wide across the entire mideast.
Why!? The most stupid comment I have ever heard anyone on Usenet
utter was "we must impose democracy on them".
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
This might take a while. But don't worry, we're making progress.
While good progress is being made by the UN forces in Afghanistan,
this is not true of the coallition forces in Iraq.
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-20 18:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by Adam H. Kerman
We have goals in Iraq? Please explain.
We are fighting a proxy war with Iran. We need to defeat Iran.
Misguided. At the start of the Second Oil War it was widely believed
that a puppet democratic government could be installed in Iraq in
place of the Saddam dictatorship. Other non-democratic countries in
the locality would see the advantages of democracy and follow the Iraq
model. This was a hopeless dream.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We are fighting Al Quaeda. We need to defeat terrorism worldwide.
Then invading Iraq was the worst thing to do. Prior to the start of
the Second Oil War there was no evidence of a functional Al Quaeda
command in Iraq. Saddam kept any dissent from terrorists well in
check. Following the near anarchy under US administration, Iraq has
fallen easy prey to Al Quaeda terrorists.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We are saving the Iraqi people from a despot. They yearn for Democracy.
The first part is correct; the second part is false. It is incorrect
to assume that Democracy is the only model of government that people
want. What people want is good governance. Good leaders,
undemocratically elected can and do provide good governance. Likewise,
democratically elected leaders can be abysmal.
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
We need to instill a western style democracy in Iraq, and then let it take
root, and help it spread far and wide across the entire mideast.
Why!? The most stupid comment I have ever heard anyone on Usenet
utter was "we must impose democracy on them".
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
This might take a while. But don't worry, we're making progress.
While good progress is being made by the UN forces in Afghanistan,
this is not true of the coallition forces in Iraq.
I think we agree, and that you missed my intended irony.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Ace
2007-09-20 20:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
I think we agree, and that you missed my intended irony.
Oh!

And I thought that it was the British who understood irony!!!
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-16 16:05:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Colin Campbell
2007-09-16 23:25:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission
is.

At this point I regard anybody not understanding what is going on as
deliberate ignorance. (In other words: the reason you do not
understand is because you made a conscious decision that you do not
want to understand.)

And BTW - the fact that you have just admitted that you do not know
enough about Iraq to make an informed opinion tells us exactly how
seriously we can take anything you say on the subject.



--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-17 00:38:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!

Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops.
At this point I regard anybody not understanding what is going on as
deliberate ignorance. (In other words: the reason you do not
understand is because you made a conscious decision that you do not
want to understand.)
And BTW - the fact that you have just admitted that you do not know
enough about Iraq to make an informed opinion tells us exactly how
seriously we can take anything you say on the subject.
You keep posting to Usenet telling other people what they should know.
You don't actually say anything yourself.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Is your .sig about Iraq? There are sacrifices and suffering. No victory
and no freedom. Amazing.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-17 01:19:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?

<snip>
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-17 04:55:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?

In any event, it's a non sequitur. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me
what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Ace
2007-09-17 05:49:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?
In any event, it's a non sequitur. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me
what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Put Iraq's weapons of mass destruction beyond use and secure and hold
the World's second largest proven oil reserves.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-17 15:54:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?
Yes...101st Airborne and 8th ID. 19D Cavalry Scout.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-17 16:04:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?
Yes...101st Airborne and 8th ID. 19D Cavalry Scout.
Good for you. How many times were you consulted about overall policy for
pursuing a war's ultimate objectives?
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
You already know what I think of your rant. Funny how none of you has
actually contradicted any of my cynical comments.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
None of you has any particular knowledge about the war's true purpose.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-17 16:48:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?
Yes...101st Airborne and 8th ID. 19D Cavalry Scout.
Good for you. How many times were you consulted about overall policy for
pursuing a war's ultimate objectives?
Honestly there were briefs all the time about the
who's/what's/why's/where's etc.....command always makes sure the guys
on the ground with the guns know WTF is going on....it is just sound
logic to make sure your soldiers know what's up.

You are twisting things...Colin said: "That's odd. The troops in Iraq
seem to understand what the mission is."

They certainly do because they are informed and they are briefed
regularly.

Now you are twisting that into something entirely different.
Never once did Colin say that Soldiers/Marines dictate policy.
Soldiers/Marines carry out the orders that are given to them by
command and those orders are dictated to command by the elected
civilian US government. Soldiers and Marines are informed about the
mission and the policy that dictates that mission because an informed
soldier/marines is a better soldier/marine when he knows what/why he's
fighting.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
You already know what I think of your rant. Funny how none of you has
actually contradicted any of my cynical comments.
Cynical comments? Oh dear Adam...Don't characterize yourself as a
fuckheaded trolling asshole....I'd hate to see that.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
None of you has any particular knowledge about the war's true purpose.
I believe Colin has...since he's BTDT....But fuck...don't take his
word for it...you obvious know better and are willing to make sure
that people who have been in the military know that you know better.

And for the record...I don't agree with the war nor the motives for
starting it...

But....I won't see a fucking wuss like you put out obvious
mis-information about my comrades and my former branch of the
military.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-17 18:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what
the hell we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear
out that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure
that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
Have you?
Yes...101st Airborne and 8th ID. 19D Cavalry Scout.
Good for you. How many times were you consulted about overall policy for
pursuing a war's ultimate objectives?
Honestly there were briefs all the time about the
who's/what's/why's/where's etc.....command always makes sure the guys
on the ground with the guns know WTF is going on....it is just sound
logic to make sure your soldiers know what's up.
I can imagine the men are told about short-term objectives. If they are
deployed in certain provinces, they are informed of insurgent activity.
But the men in country three years ago... Were they told of the nature
of the occupation (when apparently the Administration hadn't actually
decided to occupy Iraq)? Our men watched as Bagdad was looted and
destroyed as there weren't orders to secure important government and
cultural institutions or commercial areas. Were our men told about
disbanding the Iraqi army and how to secure the weapons depots so they
didn't become a highly-trained and heavily armed insurgency?
Post by K. A. Cannon
You are twisting things...Colin said: "That's odd. The troops in Iraq
seem to understand what the mission is."
They certainly do because they are informed and they are briefed
regularly.
Now you are twisting that into something entirely different.
Am I? What is the mission?
Post by K. A. Cannon
Never once did Colin say that Soldiers/Marines dictate policy.
Nor did I. I suggested that they aren't consulted.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers/Marines carry out the orders that are given to them by
command and those orders are dictated to command by the elected
civilian US government.
Yeah, that's the theory. Didn't quite have any orders from the
administration in practice. For three years, we've been playing catchup.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers and Marines are informed about the mission and the policy that
dictates that mission because an informed soldier/marines is a better
soldier/marine when he knows what/why he's fighting.
Someone should kindly let the taxpayers know.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
You already know what I think of your rant. Funny how none of you has
actually contradicted any of my cynical comments.
Cynical comments? Oh dear Adam...Don't characterize yourself as a
fuckheaded trolling asshole....I'd hate to see that.
I'll happily characterize you that way, as you are going out of your way
to misconstrue what I've written plainly.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
None of you has any particular knowledge about the war's true purpose.
I believe Colin has...since he's BTDT....But fuck...don't take his
word for it...you obvious know better and are willing to make sure
that people who have been in the military know that you know better.
Colin hasn't said shit about the war's true purpose, just that everyone
knows what it is.
Post by K. A. Cannon
And for the record...I don't agree with the war nor the motives for
starting it...
Isn't that special. But according to you, no civilian is allowed to
question anything at all.
Post by K. A. Cannon
But....I won't see a fucking wuss like you
Oh, fuck off yourself. You have no moral superiority whatsoever.
Schoolyard bullies have no honor.
Post by K. A. Cannon
put out obvious mis-information about my comrades and my former branch of
the military.
I didn't put out any information and I didn't put down any branch of the
military, you sanctimoneous prick. I expressed an opinion. We do that on
Usenet. You couldn't offer a valid counter-opinion so resorted to insults.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-17 19:27:36 UTC
Permalink
"Adam H. Kerman" <***@chinet.com> posted
<46eeca74$0$47100$***@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> in
us.config on 17 Sep 2007 18:41:56 GMT:

<snip>
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Honestly there were briefs all the time about the
who's/what's/why's/where's etc.....command always makes sure the guys
on the ground with the guns know WTF is going on....it is just sound
logic to make sure your soldiers know what's up.
I can imagine
You can imagine?
Imagine? So you are going with pure supposition. You are using your
imagination to theorize on what you really have no first hand
information or experience with.
Brilliant!!

Why don't you just admit that you don't know.

<snip big tangentials that don't have anything to do with Adam *not*
knowing about what Soldiers and Marines know.>

Ah yes...ole hindsight is 20/20.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
You are twisting things...Colin said: "That's odd. The troops in Iraq
seem to understand what the mission is."
They certainly do because they are informed and they are briefed
regularly.
Now you are twisting that into something entirely different.
Am I? What is the mission?
The mission for Soldiers and Marines is whatever required for that
particular day.

Oh...I see...Soldiers/Marines should know the *whole big picture*.
And your implying that they don't...that they are uninformed, that
they don't know.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Never once did Colin say that Soldiers/Marines dictate policy.
Nor did I. I suggested that they aren't consulted.
"Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear
out that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure
that area!"

You imply that the Soldiers/Marines do no know what the Big Picture
is.

"Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops."

Yea....The Joint Chiefs are just there to fill chairs in a conference
room. And those guys don't listen to the commanders on the ground, nor
the Troops in the field. Even though many new policies in Iraq have
been implemented "from the ground pounders up".

You don't know and you are prejudiced and mis-informed.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers/Marines carry out the orders that are given to them by
command and those orders are dictated to command by the elected
civilian US government.
Yeah, that's the theory. Didn't quite have any orders from the
administration in practice. For three years, we've been playing catchup.
Don't forget to add "in my opinion."
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers and Marines are informed about the mission and the policy that
dictates that mission because an informed soldier/marines is a better
soldier/marine when he knows what/why he's fighting.
Someone should kindly let the taxpayers know.
The whole interweb is right at yer fingertips...and you can't find
out?
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
You already know what I think of your rant. Funny how none of you has
actually contradicted any of my cynical comments.
Cynical comments? Oh dear Adam...Don't characterize yourself as a
fuckheaded trolling asshole....I'd hate to see that.
I'll happily characterize you that way, as you are going out of your way
to misconstrue what I've written plainly.
Plainly? You don't know what you are talking about, and you are
misconstruing a lot but now you are offended when it is pointed out?
Tsk tsk.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
None of you has any particular knowledge about the war's true purpose.
I believe Colin has...since he's BTDT....But fuck...don't take his
word for it...you obvious know better and are willing to make sure
that people who have been in the military know that you know better.
Colin hasn't said shit about the war's true purpose, just that everyone
knows what it is.
Everybody but you.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
And for the record...I don't agree with the war nor the motives for
starting it...
Isn't that special. But according to you, no civilian is allowed to
question anything at all.
Nope...Civilians shold be allowed to make grand all encompassing
statements about the military when that civilian doesn't know the
facts. Especially when the facts are easily found.
And people who know the facts should be allowed to point out what is
wrong....That's how UseNet works also.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
But....I won't see a fucking wuss like you
Oh, fuck off yourself. You have no moral superiority whatsoever.
Schoolyard bullies have no honor.
Ahem...You never answered...Have *you* served in the military?
If you haven't then I do have a moral superiority over you in that
regard as I know what I am talking about.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
put out obvious mis-information about my comrades and my former branch of
the military.
I didn't put out any information and I didn't put down any branch of the
military, you sanctimoneous prick. I expressed an opinion. We do that on
Usenet. You couldn't offer a valid counter-opinion so resorted to insults.
You characterize the soldiers as un-informed drones who only have the
barest inkling of what the mission is...that being take that hill,
take that house, hold that place. It shows how ill-informed you are
about the military.
I guess I take it personally as I used to be a soldier...and a lot of
the people who have replied to you are soldiers.

You have an opinion...good...it's ill informed and wrong.

Please continue illustrating that you have no idea what you are
talking about with regards to the Military.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-18 03:23:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip>
Don't snip attribution lines while retaining quotes, douchebag.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Honestly there were briefs all the time about the
who's/what's/why's/where's etc.....command always makes sure the guys
on the ground with the guns know WTF is going on....it is just sound
logic to make sure your soldiers know what's up.
I can imagine
You can imagine?
Imagine? So you are going with pure supposition. You are using your
imagination to theorize on what you really have no first hand
information or experience with.
Brilliant!!
I said that earlier. We're all impressed with your very late grasp of
the obvious. At least something penetrates eventually.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Why don't you just admit that you don't know.
I don't know what the mission is. The OP claimed he knew, so I asked.
Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip big tangentials that don't have anything to do with Adam *not*
knowing about what Soldiers and Marines know.>
Ah yes...ole hindsight is 20/20.
A disconnected reference. This ain't a conversation.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
You are twisting things...Colin said: "That's odd. The troops in Iraq
seem to understand what the mission is."
They certainly do because they are informed and they are briefed
regularly.
Now you are twisting that into something entirely different.
Am I? What is the mission?
The mission for Soldiers and Marines is whatever required for that
particular day.
No. Really? I said something along those same lines in the very first
post that you objected to so very strenuously. You're being an asshole
for its own sake.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Oh...I see...Soldiers/Marines should know the *whole big picture*.
No, the OP said that, so I asked him what the fucking mission was.
Post by K. A. Cannon
And your implying that they don't...that they are uninformed, that
they don't know.
Coulda sworn I said it straight out. There's that grasp of the obvious
thing working for you again.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Never once did Colin say that Soldiers/Marines dictate policy.
Nor did I. I suggested that they aren't consulted.
"Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear
out that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure
that area!"
You imply that the Soldiers/Marines do no know what the Big Picture is.
I'm saying NO ONE knows what the Big Picture is. What's the fucking
mission in Iraq?
Post by K. A. Cannon
"Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops."
Yea....The Joint Chiefs are just there to fill chairs in a conference
room. And those guys don't listen to the commanders on the ground, nor
the Troops in the field. Even though many new policies in Iraq have
been implemented "from the ground pounders up".
Nothing to do with what I said isn't known about the overall mission.
Post by K. A. Cannon
You don't know and you are prejudiced and mis-informed.
No, I'm not informed. The OP claimed he knew, but he hasn't shared.
Shove that prejudice shit back into your ass.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers/Marines carry out the orders that are given to them by
command and those orders are dictated to command by the elected
civilian US government.
Yeah, that's the theory. Didn't quite have any orders from the
administration in practice. For three years, we've been playing catchup.
Don't forget to add "in my opinion."
Why? Are you too stupid to look at the From header? You think if I wrote
something, it's your opinion? This is the most idiotic crap from you...
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Soldiers and Marines are informed about the mission and the policy that
dictates that mission because an informed soldier/marines is a better
soldier/marine when he knows what/why he's fighting.
Someone should kindly let the taxpayers know.
The whole interweb is right at yer fingertips...and you can't find out?
Again, the OP claimed to know what the mission was. I asked him to tell us.
By all means, point out where the war's fucking objective is stated on
the Web. Every time Bush states an objective, he does so to lower
expectations of accomplishing anything useful still further.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
In any event, it's a non sequitur.
Ummm....No...If you make noises about how you know what soldiers know
then you should have some experience in that field. Obviously you
don't so whatever characterizations you may make about being a soldier
are *not* based upon real world experience. Therefore...youse is fulla
shit cause ya don't know.
You already know what I think of your rant. Funny how none of you has
actually contradicted any of my cynical comments.
Cynical comments? Oh dear Adam...Don't characterize yourself as a
fuckheaded trolling asshole....I'd hate to see that.
I'll happily characterize you that way, as you are going out of your way
to misconstrue what I've written plainly.
Plainly? You don't know what you are talking about, and you are
misconstruing a lot but now you are offended when it is pointed out?
Tsk tsk.
No, just dealing with the usual Usenet assholery from someone who
refuses to give his own opinion but happily insults. It's in lieu of
actual intelligence.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
None of you has any particular knowledge about the war's true purpose.
I believe Colin has...since he's BTDT....But fuck...don't take his
word for it...you obvious know better and are willing to make sure
that people who have been in the military know that you know better.
Colin hasn't said shit about the war's true purpose, just that everyone
knows what it is.
Everybody but you.
You don't know.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
And for the record...I don't agree with the war nor the motives for
starting it...
Isn't that special. But according to you, no civilian is allowed to
question anything at all.
Nope...Civilians shold be allowed to make grand all encompassing
statements about the military when that civilian doesn't know the
facts.
Tell us the facts. What's the overall mission? I didn't blame the
military for any of the fiascos, dipshit. You do have a problem with
reading things I never wrote.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Especially when the facts are easily found.
You didn't offer any facts, so they must not be so easily found.
Post by K. A. Cannon
And people who know the facts should be allowed to point out what is
wrong....That's how UseNet works also.
No one offered any facts.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
But....I won't see a fucking wuss like you
Oh, fuck off yourself. You have no moral superiority whatsoever.
Schoolyard bullies have no honor.
Ahem...You never answered...Have *you* served in the military?
If you haven't then I do have a moral superiority over you in that
regard as I know what I am talking about.
Go run it up the flagpole and fuck yourself with it. I reiterate:
Bullies have no honor.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by K. A. Cannon
put out obvious mis-information about my comrades and my former branch of
the military.
I didn't put out any information and I didn't put down any branch of the
military, you sanctimoneous prick. I expressed an opinion. We do that on
Usenet. You couldn't offer a valid counter-opinion so resorted to insults.
You characterize the soldiers as un-informed drones who only have the
barest inkling of what the mission is...that being take that hill,
take that house, hold that place. It shows how ill-informed you are
about the military.
I guess I take it personally as I used to be a soldier...and a lot of
the people who have replied to you are soldiers.
Who cares? Thus far, you haven't offered an actual opinion, only
insults. Perhaps if you had tried to offer a real world example, I might
have been persuaded. Your conversational skills are much too limited for
that. Nevertheless, the men on the ground are not told what the overall
mission objective is of the overall war.

Why did we invade Iraq? If the men were told what the UN was told, that
was all exposed as lies.
Post by K. A. Cannon
You have an opinion...good...it's ill informed and wrong.
I don't have an opinion. I asked a question about why we are there.
Really don't give a damn if it hurt your widdle feewings.

Here's an example: When I observe you're an asshole, that's an insult.
When I state that the men on the ground aren't told what the overall
objective of invading and occupying Iraq is, that's not insulting the
troops and not insulting the military. No one expects the military to be
a democracy; no one expects the troops to be given a choice.
Post by K. A. Cannon
Please continue illustrating that you have no idea what you are
talking about with regards to the Military.
Still haven't heard anything worthwhile. From years of experience with
you, I already knew that you're capable of taking offense. What you're
rarely capable of doing is offering useful information.

You dug yourself into a really deep pit by taking offense at something
only an idiot would misconstrue.
Ace
2007-09-18 06:49:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Who cares? Thus far, you haven't offered an actual opinion, only
insults. Perhaps if you had tried to offer a real world example, I might
have been persuaded. Your conversational skills are much too limited for
that. Nevertheless, the men on the ground are not told what the overall
mission objective is of the overall war.
The mission has changed.

Originally it was to rid the World of Saddam Hussein and his country's
weapons of mass destruction.

Then it was to rebuild the country as a peaceful puppet of America.

I expect cut and run wil be the conclusion: American military history
suggests this to be the likely outcome.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 17:03:08 UTC
Permalink
"Adam H. Kerman" <***@chinet.com> posted
<46ef44b6$0$47111$***@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> in
us.config on 18 Sep 2007 03:23:34 GMT:

<blap>
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Bullies have no honor.
Yer a punk Adam..an anal retentive punk with a thin skin.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-19 01:08:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
<blap>
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Bullies have no honor.
Yer a punk Adam..an anal retentive punk with a thin skin.
pkb, you imbecile. You're the one who initially flew off the handle
based on an innocuous comment I made that only a moron would take as an
insult to the troops.

Shove it up your ass.
edward ohare
2007-09-18 00:32:15 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:54:26 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what he thinks the mission in Iraq is.
Keep waiting for that.
That's because most people don't know what the mission is. Here, let
me fill you in.

Americans were angry. They wanted to see someone else's stuff on TV
blowing up. That's what Bush gave them.

Then 2/3 of the 3/4 of Americans who supported this program decided
the thrill of seeing other people's stuff on TV blowing up wasn't
worth the cost.

So now Americans want out because it isn't fun anymore. Bad idea.
That's being like a six year old who breaks his toy and throws it
away. National immaturity.

America broke Iraq. America needs to stay and fix it.

I don't have any argument with the 25% or so of the people who have
been against the war from the beginning. I do question whether 25% or
so who have always been for the war really understood the cost/benefit
of what they wanted to do. But I have a real quarrel with the 50% who
were for it and now want to run. They provided the majority that got
us into Iraq. And they now provide the majority to get us out.
They're the real traitors.

The real lesson here is not to elect any more sub 100 IQ born again
alcoholics as President.
edward ohare
2007-09-18 00:16:10 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:19:32 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Have you ever been a soldier?
This is a standard answer which I've heard so many times I'm convinced
its part of basic training indoctrination. Being a soldier does not
automatically result in special knowledge about world politics,
diplomacy, or strategy. I've seen it used most often when the person
using it doesn't really have an answer, and so merely uses it to cast
doubt upon the knowledge and skill of the person he is arguing with.
Its a nice way to pretent "case closed". A person who uses this
phrase is merely alleging his opponent doesn't have the ability to
make a decent argument, where in reality the one using it is the one
who lacks that ability. Otherwise, he'd address the issue, and win,
rather than just say his opponent is inept and refuse to argue
anymore.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 01:02:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:16:10 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:19:32 -0400, K. A. Cannon
No note of snippage....and addressed kinda outta context.
Tsk tsk Ed....
Post by edward ohare
Post by K. A. Cannon
Have you ever been a soldier?
This is a standard answer which I've heard so many times I'm convinced
its part of basic training indoctrination. Being a soldier does not
automatically result in special knowledge about world politics,
diplomacy, or strategy. I've seen it used most often when the person
using it doesn't really have an answer, and so merely uses it to cast
doubt upon the knowledge and skill of the person he is arguing with.
Its a nice way to pretent "case closed". A person who uses this
phrase is merely alleging his opponent doesn't have the ability to
make a decent argument, where in reality the one using it is the one
who lacks that ability. Otherwise, he'd address the issue, and win,
rather than just say his opponent is inept and refuse to argue
anymore.
Someone making noise about knowing what a soldier knows when he's
never been a soldier should not make said noise.

JMO...YMMV...etc....
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
edward ohare
2007-09-18 01:36:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:02:22 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Someone making noise about knowing what a soldier knows when he's
never been a soldier should not make said noise.
JMO...YMMV...etc....
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
David Casey
2007-09-18 05:12:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by edward ohare
Someone making noise about knowing what a soldier knows when he's never
been a soldier should not make said noise.
JMO...YMMV...etc....
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.

Dave
--
You can talk about us, but you can't talk without us!
US Army Signal Corps!!
http://www.geocities.com/davidcasey98
Ace
2007-09-18 06:51:46 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:12:14 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 17:06:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:12:14 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
Ahem...Those who pay the people who engage the ditch digger to dig
said ditch are much more informed about why the ditch is to be dug in
the first place.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-18 17:13:38 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:06:12 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
Ahem...Those who pay the people who engage the ditch digger to dig
said ditch are much more informed about why the ditch is to be dug in
the first place.
Not when those that pay are taxpayers.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 19:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:06:12 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
Ahem...Those who pay the people who engage the ditch digger to dig
said ditch are much more informed about why the ditch is to be dug in
the first place.
Not when those that pay are taxpayers.
Taxpayers don't pay directly...It's our lovely governments who do the
paying with our tax money.

Or didn't you know that?
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-18 19:55:06 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:45:48 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:06:12 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
Ahem...Those who pay the people who engage the ditch digger to dig
said ditch are much more informed about why the ditch is to be dug in
the first place.
Not when those that pay are taxpayers.
Taxpayers don't pay directly...It's our lovely governments who do the
paying with our tax money.
If your government's record of paying for levees to protect New
Orleans is anything to go, I wouldn't trust it to know the purpose of
a ditch which it pays to be built.

Moving the discussion back, do you think that the US government knows
the objectives of the Second Oil War?
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 02:29:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:55:06 +0100, Ace
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:45:48 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:06:12 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Post by David Casey
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
No, but it does make that person more of an expert on the reasons for
digging the ditch than the guy who doesn't or hasn't dug a ditch.
No. Those who engage ditch diggers to dig a ditch are far more expert
on the reasons of ditch digging.
Ahem...Those who pay the people who engage the ditch digger to dig
said ditch are much more informed about why the ditch is to be dug in
the first place.
Not when those that pay are taxpayers.
Taxpayers don't pay directly...It's our lovely governments who do the
paying with our tax money.
If your government's record of paying for levees to protect New
Orleans is anything to go, I wouldn't trust it to know the purpose of
a ditch which it pays to be built.
Funny stuff...would you like a wonderful list of all the glowing
incompetence of the various British governments throughout the years?
It would be quite long. Much longer than the US one....your
governments have had a much longer time and is more creative than ours
in that regard.
Post by Ace
Moving the discussion back, do you think that the US government knows
the objectives of the Second Oil War?
They started it so it would stand to reason that they should.
Pretty obvious that one is doncha think?
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-19 06:06:15 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:29:05 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
If your government's record of paying for levees to protect New
Orleans is anything to go, I wouldn't trust it to know the purpose of
a ditch which it pays to be built.
Funny stuff...would you like a wonderful list of all the glowing
incompetence of the various British governments throughout the years?
It would be quite long. Much longer than the US one....your
governments have had a much longer time and is more creative than ours
in that regard.
Does King Alfred's incompetence at baking cakes in 877 do anything to
mitigate recent US government incompetence?
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Moving the discussion back, do you think that the US government knows
the objectives of the Second Oil War?
They started it so it would stand to reason that they should.
Pretty obvious that one is doncha think?
Agreed. It does stand to reason that the US government should know
the objectives of the Second Oil War. But that wasn't my question.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 17:27:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:29:05 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
If your government's record of paying for levees to protect New
Orleans is anything to go, I wouldn't trust it to know the purpose of
a ditch which it pays to be built.
Funny stuff...would you like a wonderful list of all the glowing
incompetence of the various British governments throughout the years?
It would be quite long. Much longer than the US one....your
governments have had a much longer time and is more creative than ours
in that regard.
Does King Alfred's incompetence at baking cakes in 877 do anything to
mitigate recent US government incompetence?
You miss the point....any and all governments have periods of
incompetence and ill governance. Ok...granted the US certainly seems
to have a moron in charge right now. That doesn't mean that the next
administration is going to be as bad (I hope, and I don't think it's
possible to be as bad as the current).
Incompetence and governments are inevitably linked. It's the nature of
the beast.
Post by Ace
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Moving the discussion back, do you think that the US government knows
the objectives of the Second Oil War?
They started it so it would stand to reason that they should.
Pretty obvious that one is doncha think?
Agreed. It does stand to reason that the US government should know
the objectives of the Second Oil War. But that wasn't my question.
Do they know the objectives? Bush knowing the objectives?
Doubtful. I do not think he understands what the word "objective"
means.
Do the people with some semblance of intelligence in the current
administration know what the objectives are?
Certainly.
Are those objective viable and realistic?
I dunno...that one is very serious up to interpretation.

FWIW...It seems like there is no long term disengagement plan and the
training of Iraqi forces is laughably insufficient. Part of that has
to do with the basic material being used to make up Iraqi forces.
Barely literate, uneducated and unmotivated people do not make a good
military or police. (that not being *all* of them)

YMMV...

-
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-19 20:49:04 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:27:42 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Barely literate, uneducated and unmotivated people do not make a good
military or police.
Is that the problem with the US marines?
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-20 00:24:59 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:49:04 +0100, Ace
Post by Ace
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:27:42 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Barely literate, uneducated and unmotivated people do not make a good
military or police.
Is that the problem with the US marines?
Ya know..I was trying to have a serious friendly discussion with you
and then you fuck it up...

fuck off.

plonk.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 17:04:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by edward ohare
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:02:22 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Someone making noise about knowing what a soldier knows when he's
never been a soldier should not make said noise.
JMO...YMMV...etc....
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
I *WAS NOT* in the infantry Ed.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
edward ohare
2007-09-19 01:25:23 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:04:53 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
I *WAS NOT* in the infantry Ed.
None of my comments are to be considered as personally directed unless
specifically so indicated.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 02:29:40 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:25:23 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:04:53 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by edward ohare
Knowing how to dig ditches doesn't make a person a canal designer.
I *WAS NOT* in the infantry Ed.
None of my comments are to be considered as personally directed unless
specifically so indicated.
Well...I wasn't in the Infantry Ed.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Colin Campbell
2007-09-18 01:32:46 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:19:32 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.


--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-18 03:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by edward ohare
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:19:32 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Can't tell from your comments that you know anything of any use.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 17:07:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by edward ohare
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:19:32 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
Post by g***@hotmail.com
When are the soldiers coming home ?
(mercy snipage occurs)
when the mission is done.
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
Have you ever been a soldier?
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Can't tell from your comments that you know anything of any use.
Oh my GAWD...Adam you were just insulting and didn't offer a valid
opinion. Holy CRAP...how hypocritical of yew.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Colin Campbell
2007-09-19 01:13:42 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:07:13 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Oh my GAWD...Adam you were just insulting and didn't offer a valid
opinion. Holy CRAP...how hypocritical of yew.
And this surprises you?



--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Ace
2007-09-18 06:53:35 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:46 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Looking at what's going on Iraq, it would seem no one in the US army
knows how the US army operates either.

Pure incompetence.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 17:08:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:46 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Looking at what's going on Iraq, it would seem no one in the US army
knows how the US army operates either.
Pure incompetence.
Like you'd know....
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-18 17:31:22 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:08:02 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:46 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Looking at what's going on Iraq, it would seem no one in the US army
knows how the US army operates either.
Pure incompetence.
Like you'd know....
When every battle is being won and the war being lost, incompetence is
the obvious cause.

Recall General Sir Michael Jackson's refusal to follow a direct order
from the US general Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, to
block the runways of Russian occupied Pristina Airport.

Sir Michael was right, Wesley Clark an incompetent fool.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-18 19:48:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:08:02 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:46 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Looking at what's going on Iraq, it would seem no one in the US army
knows how the US army operates either.
Pure incompetence.
Like you'd know....
When every battle is being won and the war being lost, incompetence is
the obvious cause.
Recall General Sir Michael Jackson's refusal to follow a direct order
from the US general Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander Europe, to
block the runways of Russian occupied Pristina Airport.
Heh...I remember that.
Post by Ace
Sir Michael was right, Wesley Clark an incompetent fool.
I don't disagree....Wesley Clark is/was an incompetent fool.

But that doesn't mean that all US Army generals are incompetent fools.

Actually...this could have all been avoided if GWB had the stones in
the first gulf war to actually finish the job then...BUT
NOOOOOOOO.....

feh.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Ace
2007-09-18 20:04:03 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:48:59 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Sir Michael was right, Wesley Clark an incompetent fool.
I don't disagree....Wesley Clark is/was an incompetent fool.
Consensus - wow!
Post by K. A. Cannon
But that doesn't mean that all US Army generals are incompetent fools.
OK
Post by K. A. Cannon
Actually...this could have all been avoided if GWB had the stones in
the first gulf war to actually finish the job then...BUT
NOOOOOOOO.....
I assume you mean George "HW" Bush, if so, agreed.

Is this a first? I agree with everything you say.

Wait... I think we also agree that Duh'ryl is a wanker.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 02:31:13 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:04:03 +0100, Ace
Post by Ace
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:48:59 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by Ace
Sir Michael was right, Wesley Clark an incompetent fool.
I don't disagree....Wesley Clark is/was an incompetent fool.
Consensus - wow!
Post by K. A. Cannon
But that doesn't mean that all US Army generals are incompetent fools.
OK
Post by K. A. Cannon
Actually...this could have all been avoided if GWB had the stones in
the first gulf war to actually finish the job then...BUT
NOOOOOOOO.....
I assume you mean George "HW" Bush, if so, agreed.
Is this a first? I agree with everything you say.
Wait... I think we also agree that Duh'ryl is a wanker.
You think he's a wanker...I think he's a fuckhead.

Welcome back to discord...discuss?
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
edward ohare
2007-09-19 01:27:53 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 07:53:35 +0100, Ace
Post by Ace
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:46 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
You can tell from his comment that he has absolutely no clue as to how
the US Army operates.
Looking at what's going on Iraq, it would seem no one in the US army
knows how the US army operates either.
Pure incompetence.
I think the US Army is doing fine, considering they have an impossible
situation and their ultimate boss is in denial about it. What puzzles
me is why the ex Army people still support him. They, being ex have
no obligation to refrain from criticism of the President.
Colin Campbell
2007-09-18 01:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
You just displayed your ignorance of how the Army operates.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops.
You would be surprised at how seriously the military leadership takes
what the troops say. We even have special teams whose sole job is to
go out and find out what the troops know so that information can be
disseminated to everybody else.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
At this point I regard anybody not understanding what is going on as
deliberate ignorance. (In other words: the reason you do not
understand is because you made a conscious decision that you do not
want to understand.)
And BTW - the fact that you have just admitted that you do not know
enough about Iraq to make an informed opinion tells us exactly how
seriously we can take anything you say on the subject.
You keep posting to Usenet telling other people what they should know.
You don't actually say anything yourself.
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Is your .sig about Iraq? There are sacrifices and suffering. No victory
and no freedom. Amazing.
Only partially about Iraq. It is more of a comment on life in
general.




--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
edward ohare
2007-09-18 01:39:31 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:04 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on
an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can
only conclude from that statement that the mission since then was
intended to be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
David Casey
2007-09-18 05:10:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on an
aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can only
conclude from that statement that the mission since then was intended to
be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
The ground invasion, occupation, and removal of the Iraqi government had
been completed.

Dave
--
You can talk about us, but you can't talk without us!
US Army Signal Corps!!
http://www.geocities.com/davidcasey98
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-18 05:56:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Casey
Post by Colin Campbell
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on an
aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can only
conclude from that statement that the mission since then was intended to
be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
The ground invasion, occupation, and removal of the Iraqi government had
been completed.
Not the occupation.
Ace
2007-09-18 07:09:16 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:10:46 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on an
aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can only
conclude from that statement that the mission since then was intended to
be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
The ground invasion, occupation, and removal of the Iraqi government had
been completed.
Was that the mission?
edward ohare
2007-09-19 01:33:21 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 05:10:46 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
Post by Colin Campbell
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on an
aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can only
conclude from that statement that the mission since then was intended to
be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
The ground invasion, occupation, and removal of the Iraqi government had
been completed.
He didn't say "phase one of the mission". He said "the mission". Was
he so naive to believe it really was accomplished or was he lying? (I
generally favor an explanation of error, when adequate, over an
explantion of moral deficiency.)
Colin Campbell
2007-09-19 01:15:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:39:31 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:32:04 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on
an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can
only conclude from that statement that the mission since then was
intended to be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
Only an idiot can "only conclude" this based on the facts you
presented.



--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
edward ohare
2007-09-19 01:36:07 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:15:40 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:39:31 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on
an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can
only conclude from that statement that the mission since then was
intended to be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
Only an idiot can "only conclude" this based on the facts you
presented.
Then the choice is that George Bush is an idiot, or George Bush is a
liar. I pick idiot. (A person can't be lying, even if what they are
saying is false, unless they **know** its false.)
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 02:32:57 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:36:07 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:15:40 -0700, Colin Campbell
Post by Colin Campbell
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:39:31 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
So how can anyone explain that five years ago the President stood on
an aircraft carrier and proclaimed "mission accomplished"? One can
only conclude from that statement that the mission since then was
intended to be withdrawal. No need to stay after the job is done!
Only an idiot can "only conclude" this based on the facts you
presented.
Then the choice is that George Bush is an idiot, or George Bush is a
liar. I pick idiot. (A person can't be lying, even if what they are
saying is false, unless they **know** its false.)
Idiots lie all the time and don't know it.

Contemplate that on the newsgroup of woe.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
edward ohare
2007-09-20 00:43:14 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:32:57 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Idiots lie all the time and don't know it.
The point I'm trying to make is that if a person tells an untruth, but
thinks its true, he isn't lying. He's wrong. Which is why I usually
defend Bush when people call him a liar.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-20 14:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by edward ohare
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:32:57 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Idiots lie all the time and don't know it.
The point I'm trying to make is that if a person tells an untruth, but
thinks its true, he isn't lying. He's wrong. Which is why I usually
defend Bush when people call him a liar.
Ok...so using stupidity as an excuse for stupidity...I can relate.
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
Adam H. Kerman
2007-09-18 03:27:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
You just displayed your ignorance of how the Army operates.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops.
You would be surprised at how seriously the military leadership takes
what the troops say. We even have special teams whose sole job is to
go out and find out what the troops know so that information can be
disseminated to everybody else.
That's all well and good but doesn't have anything to do with my comment
that the troops aren't consulted on OVERALL policy or the reason for
invading or the reason for continuing to occupy under conditions that
are far worse than when Saddam was overthrown.
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
At this point I regard anybody not understanding what is going on as
deliberate ignorance. (In other words: the reason you do not
understand is because you made a conscious decision that you do not
want to understand.)
And BTW - the fact that you have just admitted that you do not know
enough about Iraq to make an informed opinion tells us exactly how
seriously we can take anything you say on the subject.
You keep posting to Usenet telling other people what they should know.
You don't actually say anything yourself.
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
Except that you haven't pointed anything out.
Henrietta K Thomas
2007-09-18 19:52:16 UTC
Permalink
On 18 Sep 2007 03:27:03 GMT, in us.config, "Adam H. Kerman"
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission is.
Soldiers are given tiny pieces of a mission and carry it out. Clear out
that building! Take and guard that section of territory! Secure that area!
You just displayed your ignorance of how the Army operates.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Overall policy for the entire nation? No one consults the troops.
You would be surprised at how seriously the military leadership takes
what the troops say. We even have special teams whose sole job is to
go out and find out what the troops know so that information can be
disseminated to everybody else.
That's all well and good but doesn't have anything to do with my comment
that the troops aren't consulted on OVERALL policy or the reason for
invading or the reason for continuing to occupy under conditions that
are far worse than when Saddam was overthrown.
Have you never heard the expression: "Ours is not to reason why, ours
is but to do or die."?
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by Adam H. Kerman
At this point I regard anybody not understanding what is going on as
deliberate ignorance. (In other words: the reason you do not
understand is because you made a conscious decision that you do not
want to understand.)
And BTW - the fact that you have just admitted that you do not know
enough about Iraq to make an informed opinion tells us exactly how
seriously we can take anything you say on the subject.
You keep posting to Usenet telling other people what they should know.
You don't actually say anything yourself.
I agree that it is a sad state of affairs when I have to point out
something as obvious as the fact that the only possible reason for
somebody not to know what the mission is in Iraq is willful ignorance.
Except that you haven't pointed anything out.
Lie a good Soldier, he's repeating the party line. Give him a break on
that.

I like ohare's comment earlier in the thread that we have to stay in
Iraq because we broke it. Colin Powell said pretty much the same thing
to Bush a long time ago: "If you break it, you own it."

We are there to clean up our own mess.

But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
Ace
2007-09-18 20:07:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Except that you haven't pointed anything out.
Lie a good Soldier, he's repeating the party line.
In other words, an indoctrinated pawn.
Henrietta K Thomas
2007-09-19 00:58:51 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:07:12 +0100, in us.config, Ace
Post by Ace
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Except that you haven't pointed anything out.
Lie a good Soldier, he's repeating the party line.
In other words, an indoctrinated pawn.
I wouldn't put it quite so bluntly. All Soldiers are indoctrinated.
That's the only way to have good discipline in the field. Even the
British troops which are part of the coalition.
Ace
2007-09-19 06:29:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 21:07:12 +0100, in us.config, Ace
Post by Ace
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Except that you haven't pointed anything out.
Lie a good Soldier, he's repeating the party line.
In other words, an indoctrinated pawn.
I wouldn't put it quite so bluntly. All Soldiers are indoctrinated.
That's the only way to have good discipline in the field. Even the
British troops which are part of the coalition.
There's a fundamental difference between the British and US armies.

The US has about 500,000 active duty soldiers and about 700,000
reservists.

The UK has about 110,000 active duty soldiers and about 35,000
reservists.

Also, British soldiers are generally given a lot more discretion in
how they act in combat situations. This helps to reduce mishaps.

Recall the US attack on a column of Kosova refugees. The US pilots
did not question the order to attack and the assertion that the column
was Sebian armour, but when British pilots were called in and could
not positively identify the burning debris as armour they refused the
order to attack.
redc1c4
2007-09-19 05:58:51 UTC
Permalink
Henrietta K Thomas wrote:

(mercy snipage occurs)
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.

which are you?

redc1c4,
amused by HRH participating in an OT thread. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Ace
2007-09-19 06:36:41 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
(mercy snipage occurs)
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
So why did Bush choose to finish his father's war rather than Truman's
war?

Evidence that North Korea has WMD is far greater than Iraq. Korea has
nothing the US wants, Iraq does.

And if the war was about ridding the World of an evil dictator, what
about Zimbabwe? Mugabe is far more evil than Hussein.
redc1c4
2007-09-19 14:35:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
(mercy snipage occurs)
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
So why did Bush choose to finish his father's war rather than Truman's
war?
because Truman was a Democrap, and he's Republican.....
Post by Ace
Evidence that North Korea has WMD is far greater than Iraq. Korea has
nothing the US wants, Iraq does.
if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it? it's not that
difficult a tactical problem to isolate and defend those areas, if that is
*really* what we were there for.
Post by Ace
And if the war was about ridding the World of an evil dictator, what
about Zimbabwe? Mugabe is far more evil than Hussein.
and since he's the result of y'alls stupidity, i suggest you get at it.

redc1c4,
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-19 17:35:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by redc1c4
Post by Ace
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
(mercy snipage occurs)
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
So why did Bush choose to finish his father's war rather than Truman's
war?
because Truman was a Democrap, and he's Republican.....
Post by Ace
Evidence that North Korea has WMD is far greater than Iraq. Korea has
nothing the US wants, Iraq does.
if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it? it's not that
difficult a tactical problem to isolate and defend those areas, if that is
*really* what we were there for.
Post by Ace
And if the war was about ridding the World of an evil dictator, what
about Zimbabwe? Mugabe is far more evil than Hussein.
and since he's the result of y'alls stupidity, i suggest you get at it.
I don't think Ace is ready to admit that most of the fuckery happening
in the world can be traced back to the reign of the British Empire and
The Commonwealth.
Post by redc1c4
redc1c4,
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway. %-)
They did the Falklands pretty well...lost a few ships to crazy brave
Argentinean pilots flying 25 year old A-4 Skyhawks using dumb iron
bombs.
Fighting for a piece of shit island fulla crap land and sheep.
WTF?
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
redc1c4
2007-09-19 21:26:46 UTC
Permalink
(snipage occurs)
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by redc1c4
redc1c4,
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway. %-)
They did the Falklands pretty well...lost a few ships to crazy brave
Argentinean pilots flying 25 year old A-4 Skyhawks using dumb iron
bombs.
Fighting for a piece of shit island fulla crap land and sheep.
WTF?
they had a much bigger military then.... and it's getting smaller as we speak.

redc1c4,
pretty soon even "Ace" will be able to take them on.... %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Ace
2007-09-20 05:46:22 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:35:36 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Fighting for a piece of shit island fulla crap land and sheep.
WTF?
There is, of course, oil in the vicinity. That makes a difference.
Ace
2007-09-19 20:51:10 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:35:39 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway
Compare and contrast the British in Sierra Leone with the US in
Somalia.
redc1c4
2007-09-19 21:28:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:35:39 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway
Compare and contrast the British in Sierra Leone with the US in
Somalia.
answer the question instead of dodging it.

redc1c4,
(or simply admit y'alls shortcomings for a change. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Ace
2007-09-20 05:56:28 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:28:23 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
Post by Ace
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:35:39 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
except i doubt you can project power that far, without help anyway
Compare and contrast the British in Sierra Leone with the US in
Somalia.
answer the question instead of dodging it.
Q. if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it?

A. Because extracting it all then storing it all is not a job the US
military is equipped to do. Installing a puppet government to do the
job for the US seemed an easier task.

I was only avoiding the question because it was dumb.
David Casey
2007-09-20 17:03:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
Q. if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it?
A. Because extracting it all then storing it all is not a job the US
military is equipped to do. Installing a puppet government to do the
job for the US seemed an easier task.
I was only avoiding the question because it was dumb.
More likely it took you a while to come up with an answer. You should have
thought about it more.

Dave
--
You can talk about us, but you can't talk without us!
US Army Signal Corps!!
http://www.geocities.com/davidcasey98
Ace
2007-09-20 20:24:37 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:03:31 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
Post by Ace
Q. if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it?
A. Because extracting it all then storing it all is not a job the US
military is equipped to do. Installing a puppet government to do the
job for the US seemed an easier task.
I was only avoiding the question because it was dumb.
More likely it took you a while to come up with an answer. You should have
thought about it more.
So what's your answer to Red's question?
redc1c4
2007-09-20 23:19:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:03:31 GMT, David Casey
Post by David Casey
Post by Ace
Q. if all we wanted was the oil, why didn't we just take it?
A. Because extracting it all then storing it all is not a job the US
military is equipped to do. Installing a puppet government to do the
job for the US seemed an easier task.
I was only avoiding the question because it was dumb.
More likely it took you a while to come up with an answer. You should have
thought about it more.
So what's your answer to Red's question?
he understands, as do i, that the tactical issues of securing the oil fields*
in Iraq is a straightforward military exercise, if that's all you're interested
in.

that we haven't done that instead of trying to rebuild a nation is all the
proof an intelligent person needs to know the oil wasn't our goal.

*("oil fields" meaning a significant amount of current capacity or known
reserves, not every single well head in country.)

redc1c4,
pointing out the obvious, to the oblivious. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
edward ohare
2007-09-21 01:26:10 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:19:47 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
he understands, as do i, that the tactical issues of securing the oil fields*
in Iraq is a straightforward military exercise, if that's all you're interested
in.
Of course, securing the pipelines and transport is a different story.
All in all, its still cheaper to buy it than to steal it and try to
protect it.
K. A. Cannon
2007-09-21 05:03:10 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 21:26:10 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:19:47 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
he understands, as do i, that the tactical issues of securing the oil fields*
in Iraq is a straightforward military exercise, if that's all you're interested
in.
Of course, securing the pipelines and transport is a different story.
All in all, its still cheaper to buy it than to steal it and try to
protect it.
Doncha think someone shoudl tell the monkey in the Whitehouse that?
--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

http://www.insurgent.org/

#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
redc1c4
2007-09-21 05:35:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by K. A. Cannon
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 21:26:10 -0400, edward ohare
Post by edward ohare
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:19:47 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
he understands, as do i, that the tactical issues of securing the oil fields*
in Iraq is a straightforward military exercise, if that's all you're interested
in.
Of course, securing the pipelines and transport is a different story.
All in all, its still cheaper to buy it than to steal it and try to
protect it.
Doncha think someone shoudl tell the monkey in the Whitehouse that?
if the only issue is securing the transport & pipelines, all you need is an
open ROE and lots of ammo.

once you drive out any native population near the LOCs, keeping the area
empty is a straightforward military exercise, given the general nature of
the terrain. the value of the oil would more than cover the costs for sensors,
ammo and fuel. hell, you could even slant drill into Iran, and steal their oil
at the same time, or just mine their ports and drive up the world price, making
more money while fucking them over. talk about a "win/win". %-)

redc1c4,
it might not be popular or moral, but it wouldn't be difficult.
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Ace
2007-09-21 06:00:17 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:35:34 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
once you drive out any native population near the LOCs, keeping the area
empty is a straightforward military exercise, given the general nature of
the terrain. the value of the oil would more than cover the costs for sensors,
ammo and fuel. hell, you could even slant drill into Iran, and steal their oil
at the same time, or just mine their ports and drive up the world price, making
more money while fucking them over. talk about a "win/win". %-)
Rubbish.

Never in history has an attempt to keep unwnated people out of a
significant land area worked.

Hadrian's Wall failed to keep the Scottish barbarians out of
Britannia; the Great Wall of China failed to keep the Mongols from
raiding the villages and towns of China; Offa's Dyke failed to secure
Wales from English attacks and eventual conquest; The Iron Curtain
failed to stop Western European democracy spreading to Eastern Europe;
the Great Firewall of China fails to stop dissident websites appearing
on computer screens in Chinese universities.

Any attempt to secure Iraq's oil pipelines against terrorist attack is
doomed to failure before it's begun. It's a harebrained suggestion.
redc1c4
2007-09-21 07:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ace
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:35:34 -0700, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
once you drive out any native population near the LOCs, keeping the area
empty is a straightforward military exercise, given the general nature of
the terrain. the value of the oil would more than cover the costs for sensors,
ammo and fuel. hell, you could even slant drill into Iran, and steal their oil
at the same time, or just mine their ports and drive up the world price, making
more money while fucking them over. talk about a "win/win". %-)
Rubbish.
Never in history has an attempt to keep unwnated people out of a
significant land area worked.
Hadrian's Wall failed to keep the Scottish barbarians out of
Britannia; the Great Wall of China failed to keep the Mongols from
raiding the villages and towns of China; Offa's Dyke failed to secure
Wales from English attacks and eventual conquest; The Iron Curtain
failed to stop Western European democracy spreading to Eastern Europe;
the Great Firewall of China fails to stop dissident websites appearing
on computer screens in Chinese universities.
Any attempt to secure Iraq's oil pipelines against terrorist attack is
doomed to failure before it's begun. It's a harebrained suggestion.
open ground, no native population, free fire ROE, and lots of incentive.

i don't have to secure them against *all* attack, i just have to get enough
out to make it worth whatever the cost is. pinpricks are simply another cost
of doing business, that i pass on to the consumer.

of course, taking tha Saudi & Kuwaiti fields would be even easier, but they're
a lot closer to being dry..... kind of like the North Sea.

redc1c4,
it doesn't have to be perfect to be profitable..... %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Ace
2007-09-21 05:49:59 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:03:10 -0400, K. A. Cannon
Post by K. A. Cannon
Post by edward ohare
Of course, securing the pipelines and transport is a different story.
All in all, its still cheaper to buy it than to steal it and try to
protect it.
Doncha think someone shoudl tell the monkey in the Whitehouse that?
I think that he realised that a few months ago when he admitted that
America was "addicted to oil" and announced a raft of "green" measures
to reduce America's reliance on Middle Eastern oil.
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-19 18:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by redc1c4
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
which are you?
Which one is Alan Greenspan?
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
redc1c4
2007-09-19 21:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
Post by redc1c4
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
which are you?
Which one is Alan Greenspan?
tool.

redc1c4,
(although he was a fool when he was running the Fed. %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Colin Campbell
2007-09-20 01:13:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, redc1c4
Post by redc1c4
(mercy snipage occurs)
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
But the underlying cause has always been the oil, no wonder what our
fearless leader says.
only a fool or a tool would claim that this is/was about oil.
which are you?
Based on her posting history - I would say that she has problems with
reality.



--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Henrietta K Thomas
2007-09-20 14:46:15 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, in us.config, redc1c4
<***@drunkenbastards.org.ies> wrote:

<...>
Post by redc1c4
amused by HRH participating in an OT thread. %-)
Just following your lead, red. You made the thread on-topic when you
responded to the root article. :)

And besides, it's an interesting thread.

And besides, I need something to do while I'm waiting for the US website
to reappear.

Carry on.....
Daryl Hunt
2007-09-20 20:23:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrietta K Thomas
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 05:58:51 GMT, in us.config, redc1c4
<...>
Post by redc1c4
amused by HRH participating in an OT thread. %-)
Just following your lead, red. You made the thread on-topic when you
responded to the root article. :)
And besides, it's an interesting thread.
And besides, I need something to do while I'm waiting for the US website
to reappear.
Carry on.....
Now, this is rich. Red complaing about infractions of rules? ROLFLMAO
E***@spamblock.panix.com
2007-09-17 03:39:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Campbell
Post by E***@spamblock.panix.com
"The mission" is so ill-defined that it is not clear either what the hell
we are dying for, nor whether it will ever be "done".
That's odd. The troops in Iraq seem to understand what the mission
is.
To a man, Kreskin?
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...