Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #21

    Sep 11, 2010, 01:27 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    You're joking right ?
    Tell that to the Montagnard hill tribes who are pretty much the victim of complete genocide . Buddhists and Christians are routinely persecuted . Millions of people were put in concentration camps ....oops I mean “re-education camps” ..for over 20 years after the war. Estimates are that over 165,000 people died there.

    Evita was there this summer and was very critical of their human rights record. The West has been conned by a combination of propaganda about their embrace of a market economy ,and a large dose of false guilt for trying to keep the country free.

    Vietnam: Repression Intensifies Prior to Party Congress | Human Rights Watch
    Tom you guys left those people behind knowing that they would be persecuted just as anyone in the South who had sided with you would be persecuted and "reeducated". The price of losing a war is someone pays but you guys just went home and from the safety of your backyard you can be critical. How much concern was shown for all those who would be killed because they trusted the US, what did you do to prevent it? It will be the same in Afghanistan, when you leave as you inevitiably must, there will be those who pay for backing you
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #22

    Sep 11, 2010, 01:36 AM

    Yeah ,you got that right .Our shame was their abandonment .

    But a rewrite of the history is not helpful. To say they were better off after we left is to say people who's permanent existence is under the jack boot of oppression's lives are good.
    While our troops fought for their freedom against communist oppression they had hope.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #23

    Sep 11, 2010, 01:38 AM
    Duplicate post
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #24

    Sep 11, 2010, 06:56 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Yeah ,you got that right .Our shame was their abandonment .

    But a rewrite of the history is not helpful. To say they were better off after we left is to say people who's permanent existance is under the jack boot of oppression's lives are good.
    While our troops fought for their freedom against communist oppression they had hope.
    Tom they are better off today than when their country was been torn apart and defoliated, that they have less freedom than you or they may have desired is relative, probably 2 billion people could not be described as free but they don't live in poverty, while another 2 billion live in abject poverty and cannot exercise what freedoms they might have. Our shame today is our inability to help those who need it even though we have the means

    Afghanistan is like Vietnam, it is being torn apart for the sake of ideology, and when it ends there will be a lot of victims and very few who will be better off for some time. Do the Afghans have hope, I wonder what form it takes
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #25

    Sep 11, 2010, 07:08 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Yeah ,you got that right .Our shame was their abandonment
    Hello again, tom:

    Actually, our shame was not WINNING the war in the first place. Then we wouldn't have had to abandon anybody. But, we don't learn much.

    Like Iraq and Afghanistan, we LOST the war in Vietnam LONG before we actually left. That happened when we decided NOT to win it - somewhere around 1967... We decided NOT to win in Afghanistan when we took our eyes off the ball and invaded Iraq. We decided NOT to win in Iraq when we went in under FALSE pretenses and with a "small footprint". Plus we had NO plans (that's NONE) for the Iraqi occupation an insurgency that followed.

    Yes, there WILL be more killing fields in Iraq and Afghanistan when we leave. What? You think it's different this time? You think we learned how to fight a war?? Nahhh. We didn't.

    excon
    smoothy's Avatar
    smoothy Posts: 25,490, Reputation: 2853
    Uber Member
     
    #26

    Sep 11, 2010, 05:37 PM

    excon... losing had nothing ot do with Iraq. It was all about measured responses. When you do that you limit yourself to the capacity of you opponent.

    You will never win like that... you go in, kick but with Overwhelming force... you kill anything in the area where opposition erupts... and it won't take long before people allow these scum to hide behind their skirts and children when they know their butt is on the line as well.

    That's what won WW2. Think Measured response would have worked with Germany? Nope. THing Measured response would have worked with Japan? Nope.

    Overwhelming force, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead is what won the war, not some pantywastes idea of Measured response.

    I really don't know WHO was responsible for that stupid concept nor do I care... but he was as big a pantywaste and anyone that used it thinking it was a good idea was too.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #27

    Sep 11, 2010, 05:55 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by smoothy View Post

    You will never win like that....you go in, kick but with OVERWELMING force...you kill anything in the area where opposition erupts...and it won't take long before people allow these scum to hide behind their skirts and children when they know their butt is on the line as well.

    .
    You quote WWII but the enemy wore uniforms and were identifiable and your overwhelming force philosopy led to soviet paranoia and the years of the cold war, which we have only recently recovered from in most parts of the world. What happens if you apply your philosophy to Afghanistan? A jackbooted occupation? You can't identify the enemy in Afghanistan without using methods which run contrary to your own philosopy. How do you identify the enemy in Afghanistan? Do you shoot every man who wears a chemise and pork pie hat? Or do you shoot every man who carries a gun? I suggest you test that idea in your own cities. Your idea of overwhelming force is out of place, your kill everything philosophy is the same idea your nation has had for centuries and we see the outcome in your own native Americans. You have to stop seeing the world through eighteenth century eyes
    Catsmine's Avatar
    Catsmine Posts: 3,826, Reputation: 739
    Pest Control Expert
     
    #28

    Sep 11, 2010, 06:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by smoothy View Post
    You will never win like that....you go in, kick but with OVERWELMING force...you kill anything in the area where opposition erupts...and it won't take long before people allow these scum to hide behind their skirts and children when they know their butt is on the line as well.
    A more recent example was Mogadishu. We went in under ROE's that said if anybody even looks like they have a weapon drop a hammer on them. Then Bubba took office, instituted this "measured response," and the bad guys got a lucky shot and played pile-on, resulting in a Time magazine cover of a naked desecrated Marine's corpse.
    DG's Avatar
    DG Posts: 1,375, Reputation: 109
    Ultra Member
     
    #29

    Sep 11, 2010, 06:11 PM

    I agree with catsmine.
    God Bless You.
    smoothy's Avatar
    smoothy Posts: 25,490, Reputation: 2853
    Uber Member
     
    #30

    Sep 11, 2010, 07:34 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    you quote WWII but the enemy wore uniforms and were identifiable and your overwhelming force philosopy led to soviet paranoia and the years of the cold war, which we have only recently recovered from in most parts of the world. What happens if you apply your philosophy to Afghanistan? a jackbooted occupation? You can't identify the enemy in Afghanistan without using methods which run contrary to your own philosopy. How do you identify the enemy in Afghanistan? Do you shoot every man who wears a chemise and pork pie hat? Or do you shoot every man who carries a gun? I suggest you test that idea in your own cities. Your idea of overwhelming force is out of place, your kill everything philosophy is the same idea your nation has had for centuries and we see the outcome in your own native Americans. You have to stop seeing the world through eigtheenth century eyes
    International Rules of war require Uniforms...

    Cowards that doen't wear uniforms don't deserve Geneva Convention entitlements.

    Terrorists are cowards that hide behind civilians and civilian clothes.

    People caught fighting in other wars out of uniform were never granted nor deserved Geneva Convention protection.

    Anyone caught with a gun, or With someone with a gun should be shot and killed. I don't care , Man woman or child... kill all of them if even one has or was seen with a gun. A three year old girl can kill an American just as dead as a 20 year old man.

    Muslims don't give a damn who they kill, why should we if you want to beat them... and To beat degenerates, you have ot play their game by their rules...


    I survived 9/11 by luck. Call me a cold hearted bast*** if you want... because, like I said elsewhere, they tried to kill me so this is really personal. I am OWED retribution for their actions. THe last SOB that tried to kick my butt spent a month in the hospital and months in casts. He would have gotten a cemetery plot if I wasn't stopped from finishing him off by friends of mine.

    WHen someone threatens my life I AM a cold hearted SOB ( and proud of it). AND I have been for a LOT of years, and I'm not stopping any time soon.
    smoothy's Avatar
    smoothy Posts: 25,490, Reputation: 2853
    Uber Member
     
    #31

    Sep 11, 2010, 07:35 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Catsmine View Post
    A more recent example was Mogadishu. We went in under ROE's that said if anybody even looks like they have a weapon drop a hammer on them. Then Bubba took office, instituted this "measured response," and the bad guys got a lucky shot and played pile-on, resulting in a Time magazine cover of a naked desecrated Marine's corpse.
    Exactly... how many times will it take before these idiots learn it NEVER works.
    DG's Avatar
    DG Posts: 1,375, Reputation: 109
    Ultra Member
     
    #32

    Sep 12, 2010, 07:52 PM

    It will never end.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #33

    Sep 22, 2010, 03:15 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by DG View Post
    it will never end.
    Of course it will end BO has decreed it
    smoothy's Avatar
    smoothy Posts: 25,490, Reputation: 2853
    Uber Member
     
    #34

    Sep 23, 2010, 05:31 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    Of course it will end BO has decreed it
    Yes... look how well extending the hand of friendship has worked with IRAN so far...

    All the bad guys ever wanted was to be friends... NOT!
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #35

    Sep 23, 2010, 08:22 AM

    This from Bob Woodward's new book on the AfPakia war :

    The current strategy in Afghanistan is to turn up the pressure on the Taliban through the surge, while exploring the possibility of a settlement with the insurgents, shorn of their al-Qaida affiliates.

    This strategy was sold to Obama, and he sold it in turn to his supporters, on the grounds that the surge would shorten the war. The strategy falls down if the Taliban leadership in the Quetta Shura – and its Afghan and Pakistani allies – become convinced that the presidential resolve is hollow and that they do not have long to wait before the foreigners leave.
    One official involved in tentative contacts with the insurgents told me today: “They will say: If the Americans are that anxious to leave, why should we talk?”
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #36

    Sep 23, 2010, 08:30 AM

    Hello again,

    I agree. Bush lost the war. I know, I know... You want to forget. You want to pretend. But, I ain't going to letcha.

    excon
    smoothy's Avatar
    smoothy Posts: 25,490, Reputation: 2853
    Uber Member
     
    #37

    Sep 23, 2010, 08:31 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    This from Bob Woodward's new book on the AfPakia war :
    Oh I can hear the Democrats HOWLING over this book... considering he was their golden boy over what got revealed about Nixon and Watergate. How dare he blaspheme the Messiah.

    I may have to buy it to read.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #38

    Sep 23, 2010, 03:50 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    This from Bob Woodward's new book on the AfPakia war :
    We hear a lot about US strategy but in reality the Taliban would appear to have the same strategy putting more pressure on the foreign forces, I'm still waiting for the fabled offensive, the summer is gone, but I expect the delay can now be blamed on the floods in Pakistan and everyone will understand

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

What I find offensive [ 14 Answers ]

Not that it wasn't bad enough to refer to her behavior - and that of her friends - as "retarded" now she's explained that she uses that term because she (and her friends) act "retarded." This is certainly a trigger for me. I realize the OP is 14 but at what point do people become sensitive to...

How do international marketing strategy differ from the national strategy? [ 4 Answers ]

Goodmorning every one , I have 3 questions and I need an answer asap this is my first question How do international marketing strategy differ from the national strategy? I need a full explanation . Thanks in advance :) Kindest Regards ,

Offensive Fumble Advancement Rule [ 2 Answers ]

It is my memory that 20 or 30 years ago an offensive team could not gain yardage via a recovered fumble. Didn't the NCAA rule used to require the refs to mark a fumble recovered by another member of the offensive team at the point of the fumble, instead of where recovered, if downfield of the...

Neighbor's Offensive Dog Poop [ 16 Answers ]

My neighbor walks his dogs SOLELY in his backyard. This causes a seriously offensive odor. By mid-summer, the smell is so bad that we can't sit out there for any length of time without being nauseous. Can anyone suggest a solution to this problem.


View more questions Search