General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
ViriiK
http://military.revenanteagle.org/
 
ViriiK's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matstars
so first he opposes sending any troops... now he wants an all out draft?
Moore goes with whatever the wind is blowing that is the opposite of the President's position.. As long he makes money on it..
__________________
- [M]ayhem Gun Club
- [M]ilitary [M]ayhem Club
- Secretary of Defense for the PopeKevinI Administration
- Proud Sponsor of the American Military-Industrial Complex
Old 07-14-2004, 10:11 AM ViriiK is offline  
Reply With Quote
#16  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Inf
I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.
 
Inf's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matstars
so first he opposes sending any troops... now he wants an all out draft?

This would actually make sence to me on some levels.

The war has been started, so it has to be finished. And more troops there would help end this properly probably.
__________________
5160c711eb1a1fb416cb296cfa30d3c6
R.O.A.D.H.E.A.D
Removing Overt Anger, Desensitisation, and Hatred by Exercising Appropriate Discourse
koala coalition ftw!!!
Old 07-14-2004, 10:12 AM Inf is offline  
Reply With Quote
#17  

matstars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViriiK
Moore goes with whatever the wind is blowing that is the opposite of the President's position.. As long he makes money on it..


case in point. moore's a fool.
__________________
Although their work ethic might have been Puritan, their style was WILD...
Old 07-14-2004, 10:14 AM matstars is offline  
Reply With Quote
#18  

ViriiK
http://military.revenanteagle.org/
 
ViriiK's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inf
This would actually make sence to me on some levels.

The war has been started, so it has to be finished. And more troops there would help end this properly probably.
Dude, why do we need soldiers there in Afghanistan.. The war ended a long time ago.. Now it's reconstruction for the Afghanistan people. Plus Task Force 20 (The same guys that killed Hussien's sons & caught Hussien) was transferred to Afghanistan to rout out the Taliban and Terrorist Cells there..

FYI, TF20 is composed of SpecOps from the Elite Army Rangers, Delta Force, & a small portion of SEALs.. They also work with the Air Commando's of the sky (AC-130 Gunships & B-52's)
__________________
- [M]ayhem Gun Club
- [M]ilitary [M]ayhem Club
- Secretary of Defense for the PopeKevinI Administration
- Proud Sponsor of the American Military-Industrial Complex

Last edited by ViriiK; 07-14-2004 at 10:20 AM..
Old 07-14-2004, 10:14 AM ViriiK is offline  
Reply With Quote
#19  

matstars
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inf
This would actually make sence to me on some levels.

The war has been started, so it has to be finished. And more troops there would help end this properly probably.

so his stance is shaky and fickle?

ninja: sound's like he's all about money and capitalizing as a devil's advocate
__________________
Although their work ethic might have been Puritan, their style was WILD...

Last edited by matstars; 07-14-2004 at 10:18 AM..
Old 07-14-2004, 10:15 AM matstars is offline  
Reply With Quote
#20  

Vendetta
That's "Doctor Vendetta" to you
 
Vendetta's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViriiK
Dude, why do we need soldiers there in Afghanistan.. The war ended a long time ago.. Now it's reconstruction for the Afghanistan people. )


BULLSHIT. That logic doesnt work because technically combat ended in Iraq.

And tell me with a straight face that american public opinion has NOT been effectively shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq. Its incredible. Iraq deflected any attention/critcism away from Afghanistan.

Last edited by Vendetta; 07-14-2004 at 01:37 PM..
Old 07-14-2004, 01:35 PM Vendetta is offline  
Reply With Quote
#21  

Queen Pee(nis)
Elmo
I suck conservative cock
 
Queen Pee(nis)'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matstars
[url]
Moore is a coward
Moore did no research
Moore sux0rz
No, I think you are kind of wrong. Although Moore is a , he did do some research, he just analyzed it wrong. His liberal mind-set destroyed his normal thinking...
__________________
Leader and Founder of Gen[M]ay Anti-Liberal Club
Gen[M]ay Grammar Gestapo SS Trooper
Old 07-14-2004, 01:48 PM Queen Pee(nis) is offline  
Reply With Quote
#22  

Duep
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViriiK
Dude, why do we need soldiers there in Afghanistan.. The war ended a long time ago.. Now it's reconstruction for the Afghanistan people. Plus Task Force 20 (The same guys that killed Hussien's sons & caught Hussien) was transferred to Afghanistan to rout out the Taliban and Terrorist Cells there..

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA.
Old 07-14-2004, 02:41 PM Duep is offline  
Reply With Quote
#23  

brouski
 
Curses, despite my best efforts intelligent conversation has invaded this thread. Next time you won't be so lucky!

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
__________________
Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society:
we don't make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!

WHO CAN WITHSTAND HIS COCK FUCKING??

Founding member of the Weird Al Fan Club
Old 07-14-2004, 04:09 PM brouski is offline  
Reply With Quote
#24  

Baloneyflaps
JoJoFine
MASTER-B FOR SUPARMOD.
 
WE DONT NEED ANY MORE TROOPS IN FSCKING AFGHANISTAN
Old 07-14-2004, 06:52 PM Baloneyflaps is offline  
Reply With Quote
#25  

nuclearsnake
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoJoFine
WE DONT NEED ANY TROOPS IN FSCKING ANYWHERE
fixed
__________________
What's wrong with you? Jobs and war and the economy aren't as important so making sure two dudes can't get married. These freakin' liberals, man. No freakin' priorities.

ACMD eht setaloiv siht gnidaeR

6a1050623772f862c9b8267e450a4b69 [pornmay.com]
Old 07-14-2004, 06:59 PM nuclearsnake is offline  
Reply With Quote
#26  

ViriiK
http://military.revenanteagle.org/
 
ViriiK's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendetta
BULLSHIT. That logic doesnt work because technically combat ended in Iraq.

And tell me with a straight face that american public opinion has NOT been effectively shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq. Its incredible. Iraq deflected any attention/critcism away from Afghanistan.
Show me what's the problem in Afghanistan now? The country is in reconstruction as I said it.. Having friends in the military is quite informing.. Unlike you, who live, in Liberal DC Area have biases..

Seriously besides your DU sources and your BBC "Trusted" news

Let's review some things..

Refugees
The number of refugees in the world is a good measure of problems. The trend is good.
Quote:
The number of refugees and displaced people around the world has fallen by 18% to just over 17m the lowest level in a decade.

The United Nations refugee agency, which released the figures, said this was due to increased international efforts to help uprooted people.

Afghanistan was the prime example more than half a million people returned home last year.
. . .
"The statistics are very encouraging," said Ruud Lubbers, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

"Nearly 5m people ... over the past few years have been able to either go home or to find a new place to rebuild their lives.

"For them, these dry statistics reflect a special reality; the end of long years in exile and the start of a new life with renewed hope for the future."

He said the number of people returning to Afghanistan was "phenomenal".

More than half of the 1.1m refugees who returned home last year went back to Afghanistan. Large numbers also returned to Angola, Burundi and Iraq.
Now who made these "increased international efforts" in Afghanistan and Iraq possible? The BBC does not say, but they give us a hint in a picture accompanying an article on the return of Afghan refugees. The picture is captioned, "Afghan President Hamid Karzai needs more money from abroad", but next to Karzai there is an unidentified man, who looks for all the world like President Bush.

The article is titled, "Why millions of Afghans have gone home", but says nothing about the military campaign that made their return possible. Nothing. The article lets you know, vaguely, that the Taliban are no longer in charge, but has not a word on how that happened. A more honest title would be: We won't tell you why millions of Afghans have gone home. Would BBC writers be so partisan as to omit Bush's name deliberately from these two good news stories on refugees? Apparently. And it is partisanship, not nationalism, because they don't mention Tony Blair, either, the man who deserves the next largest amount of credit. At least they didn't airbrush Bush out of the picture, Soviet style.

(How good are the UN statistics on refugees? - editor. I have no idea, though given the problems at the UN one should treat anything they produce with care. They are probably right on the world wide trend and they are certainly right about the massive return of Afghans and Iraqis.)

Economy on the road.

Oh yes, you're going "But it's outside sources".. China, Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea, Mayalsia, India, etc all have American Companies in them. Why can't they join in Afghanistan?
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0...w=wn_tophead_1

Reconstruction Examples

Quote:
Originally Posted by Instapundit

INSTAPUNDIT'S AFGHANISTAN PHOTO-CORRESPONDENT, Major John Tammes, sends this:

Quote:
Some of our CERP funds were used to dig a deep irrigation well at the village of Qara Bagh. I was invited to the dedication and opening of the well. All the area leaders and the elders of the community were present. After a prayer of dedication, they fired up the pump and when the water started, they all cheered and clapped and started thanking us in English and Dari. One of the older gentlemen, a teacher, came up to me and said "Thank you. Last year, no water, now...(he glanced over at the gushing water)...thank you, thank you." This country has a way of really giving you a serious perspective check . . .
Indeed.

A soldier's testimony
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackfive
"War on paper and war in the field are as different as darkness from light, fire from water, or heaven from earth" - William Faukner, The Little Brick Church
The following is an email (via Seamus) from a Gunnery Sergeant (Gy or GySgt) in Afghanistan who is training the Afghan National Army. He is the Senior Non-Commissioned Officer (SNCOIC) of his Detachment, and his Staff Sergeants (SSgts) help him train the Afghan soldiers. In light of the recent Robert Novak article about how bad things were in Afghanistan, I thought this would be an interesting read:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunny K
There are probably many people who have a significantly greater level of education, and there may be people who have "studied" Afghanistan far more than I; and these may be just the thoughts of a Grunt out in the sand...but I thought I would share some insight into the current Afghanistan and the current status of the Afghan National Army. These thoughts are not endorsed by anyone, and I am not writing them on anyone's behest, save mine -- certainly not with anyone's permission. (Better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission).
I'll start with the Afghan National Army (ANA). As part of the Marine Detachment assigned to the ANA as combat advisors; I have spent time on a daily basis with the ANA since 30 April. It does not take long todetermine if the people you are going to train and fight with are worth your time.

These ANA soldiers of the 1st Kandak (Commando Bn) / 3rd Brigade are like having a Bn of PFC's and LCpl's. They want to learn, they want to train, they are human - just like all of us. They work their hearts out to get the mission accomplished and they do it is the harshest of conditions. It has been a pleasure to see them in garrison and in combat (we have done both already) and to see their eagerness to live up to the well earned reputation they have gained thus far.

I can take a birds eye view and see a fledgling Marine Corps 220+ Years ago -- the land in turmoil, a determination to have a free country, and the heart to make the country free.
While they have all the heart they need and the experience at combat (they have been fighting for decades), they do not have the experience at being a conventional Army. The soldiers do fabulous at squad level tactics and below. We are continuing the mission of MarDet 1 and MarDet 2 in teaching them to operate at the Company level and above. The difference lies in the changes in the mission we find at our feet.

MarDet 1 through MarDet 2 began to work garrison issues and then work into the combat missions.

MarDet 3 stepped off the plane into mission preparation. It was only a matter of weeks since landing that our advance party was flying to Kandahar Air Field (KAF) to coordinate our main body arrival. That being our mission, our status: we have had a great quantity of time spent working on small unit tactics, in combat. Based on that I feel safe saying that the ANA can conduct squad level and below with or without US intervention.

If the intent was for the ANA to operate as a guerilla force, they would be well on their way to mission accomplishment. The problem is that the mission we, as a Nation, have undertaken is to help stand up the ANA as a conventional Army. A conventional Army will need to have personnel able to operate at Company, Battalion, Brigade, Division and Corps level - and have an established support structure to facilitate support for those personnel. That just simply is not the case. A defined caste system and personal servitude (all based on culture) even in the military ranks; and rampant corruption at the senior levels of office are just a couple of the hindrances to making this awesome group of soldiers the beginning of a good Army.

There is a definite need to decide on the level of determination to accomplish the task we have given ourselves. If the ANA is to learn staff operations/staff planning; then actual PersO's, IntelO's, OpsO's and LogO's [Blackfive edit: Personnel (S-1), Intelligence (S-2), Operations/Training (S-3) and Logisitics (S-4) Operations] will need to be dedicated to come here and work those issues. I have Marine Corps Staff Sergeants advising Platoon Commanders and Platoon Sergeants, in garrison and in combat. Being the SNCOIC of this Detachment, my specific job is as the Combat Advisor to the Bn SgtMaj. I feel comfortable saying combat advisor because the SgtMaj and I have seen combat together (and will again, very soon after I write this mail).

That is the easy part - we are just a couple of grunts once the bullets start flying. The hard part is in garrison. I am an 0369 GySgt, advising a Bn SgtMaj as to what his specific duties are in garrison. At times like these I thank God for Marines like SgtMaj Rob Soto (currently at WTBn Quantico) for giving me an example to call upon when attempting to do this part of my job. My SSgts are filling in as Bn S-1/S-2/S-3 and S-4 advisors in garrison while they balance time in the field every day training the soldiers -- then, when we get to the firebases and start combat operations, all that goes out the window and they are all expected to be 0369 SSgts (by the way, of 7 SSgts, only 3 are 0369's). And like every Marine who has gone before them, they are stepping up and doing superb at the tasks assigned to them. The problem that we encounter is that while they are doing all that is asked of them with the Bn billets, it takes away from the time that could be spent perfecting small unit tactics with their soldiers. Regardless of what side of the fence you are on when it comes to which is more important - training them to be a conventional army or preparing them for combat operations - the simple fact from the Gunny's eyes is that if they fail in combat, there will be no soldiers to create the conventional army. I would like to see the size of the Marine Detachment double and add personnel who are capable, based on experience, on teaching conventional army staff planning - leaving my Marines to prepare the soldiers for combat.

The country is attempting to have a National Election this summer/fall. There are newspaper reports that critisizing the current leader of offering cabinet posts to the most significant warlords in exchange for their support. I would like to give you a few words about what this country is like.

It is a mafia. Drugs are the biggest export and by far the largest money maker. It gives food money to more people in this country than any other job. There are warlords - they are the bullies with the biggest gangs. And no matter what you may think about right or wrong - this country will succeed or fail based on the way they push their influence. They have armed and uniformed their thugs and made them a personal militia. If these militia fight against the election - it will be the bloodiest election in history.

The poverty in this country is not describable, most Americans would not understand even if I could put it in words for this mail. There are a few controlling interest's, a few warlords that control so much of the business in this country that there is nothing shy of a complete takeover of the govermnent (by a foreign force) that will change it.

And the drug trade will not stop without a massive sweep on the national level to wipe it out. The smartest thing the current leader could do is offer these warlords a position as Governor of the provinces they control. And then put their militia in the ANA military and put trade restrictions in place that prevent the corruption for getting out of hand. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

Most every political figure or military leader who wants freedom has been killed by an assassin. It is a fact of life, not a fairytale. Some basic principles apply. Know yourself and seek self improvement - that is what the current leader is doing. He is not "corrupt" because of his situation; he is taking his situation and doing what is best for his country. A massive and bloody civil war to gain control of the government has been happenning for years - it is time to make decisions that give stability to the people of this country.

I think I have been a little too long winded but I appreciate your being there for me to send this to. You can decide what is fit for print to put out...I will end with these words concerning my Marines (I'll let the officers take care of themselves).

If you sent one of these Marines from your command to support this mission - I want to personally thank you. They have been the icing on the top of my 20+ years of service and I am truly privledged for having served with them. My SSgt's are: SSgt Locke (arty), SSgt Stephens (grunt), SSgt Stahl (recon), SSgt Gerena (grunt), SSgt Elteto (tracker), SSgt Baker (grunt), and SSgt (frocked) Patry (tanker).

These SSgt's are some of the most stellar Marines we have to offer. By the way, four of them are on the Gy board this year. In case anyone wonders, I would be pleased to have them join my ranks...

Semper Fi,
Gunny K.
MarDet 3, 3 ETT (E)
Camp Phoenix

Now Vendetta, are you for Human Rights and Democracy or are you against helping the world be better? Of course you go on rattling on "We shouldn't be in Iraq, neither should we be in Afghanistan". Both countries are actually going to be democracies after both being under oppressive governments.. You don't change countries with flowers.
__________________
- [M]ayhem Gun Club
- [M]ilitary [M]ayhem Club
- Secretary of Defense for the PopeKevinI Administration
- Proud Sponsor of the American Military-Industrial Complex

Last edited by ViriiK; 07-14-2004 at 07:05 PM..
Old 07-14-2004, 07:00 PM ViriiK is offline  
Reply With Quote
#27  

ViriiK
http://military.revenanteagle.org/
 
ViriiK's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duep
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA.
What the fuck are you laughing at fuck face?
__________________
- [M]ayhem Gun Club
- [M]ilitary [M]ayhem Club
- Secretary of Defense for the PopeKevinI Administration
- Proud Sponsor of the American Military-Industrial Complex
Old 07-14-2004, 07:00 PM ViriiK is offline  
Reply With Quote
#28  

flurby
I can't think for myself so I let the Democrats do it for me!
 
Iraq != Afghan..

I think MOST people agree with Afghan...but Iraq was a farce.
Old 07-14-2004, 07:19 PM flurby is offline  
Reply With Quote
#29  

gumplunger
How many gums could a gum plunge plunge if a gumplunge could plunge gums?
 
gumplunger's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matstars
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723 - good read.

some quick cliffs:

1) Bush gets slammed for taking lazy vacations. The photograph of Bush relaxing at Camp David shows him side by side with Tony Blair (PM of the UK), you call that a goof off?

2) He also gets slammed for not reacting, frozen in a chair, Moore shows a clip of him stunned (why would he be stunned?). So let's look at the other reaction, jump out of his seat like Russell Crowe or something and say "LET'S GO GET THEM." That's great food for Moore supporters to say that he acted on haste. What a Catch 22!

3) He suggests that Saddam never attacked, killed or EVEN threatened (in his words) any American. Makes you think, how dumb can this guy be? For starters Iraq harbored Abu Nidal, a notorious gangster, responsible for deaths in the bombing of an airport in Vienna and Rome (containing Americans). He was even sentenced to death by the PLO! Then let's get into 1991, during the invasion of Kuwait, where he had his secret police hold and torture in not so nice living coniditons (sarcasm on the wording). Then after he killed Americans, (not to mention Egyptians, Syrians and Brits) , he threatened to kill even more Americans and the US even foiled a to kill President Bush (Sr.) in his visit to Kuwait. Then he harbored Abdul Rahman Yasin, who was involved in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, as a guest of the state! Let's not mention how Saddam openly celebrated 9/11 saying it was the beginning of a larger revenge. The whole moving of a cohort of Osama Bin Laden, Abu Mussab al-Zaqawi, (Refer to an intercepted letter from him to Bin Laden with much Iraqi reference, http://jimmarshall.house.gov/Zarqawi.html), from Afghanistan to Bagdad after 9/11... The intercepting of secret meetings between North Korea and Iraq (as reported in the 12/1/2003 New York Times) of Iraq plainning to buy a N. Korean missle production system... finally let's not touch the fact that Saddam had the patrols of the No Fly Zone fired at every single day for years, and the fact that Saddam was behind many suicide bombings in Israel (not to mention the Scud launches in 1991) which caused American casualties. But Moore's right, Saddam never ever hurt an American.

4) Saudi's and Bush have their hands in eachother's pockets? Saudi's hate Shiites, who we're trying to liberate. Saudi's have a monopoly over oil, something we're trying to liberate elsewhere, we've moved our Regional Military Headquarters from Saudi Arabia to Qatar... sounds like we love eachother.

5) He depicts that we send the poor blacks out to the military and to die in Iraq. Well theres much evidence that poor people volunteer to the army, its one of the easiest and successful jobs they can commit to with no education, etc.

6) He says that we've sent too few troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. Well what does this pacifist want? first he says we shouldn't send people, now he says we send too few (don't give me that, well, we already sent troops, we have to work with what we have, b/c that's bull)... what does he want, a draft??? What do you think then if (to retort to not enough troops) there is a draft how would he respond to the anti draft riots in NY (Think Gangs of New York).

7) Moore is a straight coward. He has said MANY times ithat he won't appear on TV shows where he may face hostile questioning. Sounds like a coward to me. He'll sue, Moore says, if anyone insults him...

Cliffs for Cliffs:

Moore is a coward
Moore did no research
Moore sux0rz


1.) They did so much work together that Bush couldn't come up with anything to say when reporters asked him what he was working on.

2.) I don't think his point was "Bush should have done something right away", but rather it gave Moore an opportunity to (somewhat humorously) speculate as to how Bush came up with the plan that he did after 9/11 because obviously, if Moore was to suggest that Bush should have gotten up and immediatly tackled the problem, he would have been shot down for all the reasons you mentioned. Believe it or not, he's smarter than that.

3.) Most of the things you mention in here barely qualify as a direct threat or attack on Saddam's part. For example, did you expect Saddam to denounce 9/11 attacks? Did he ever say "I'm going to have George Bush (Sr.) killed"? If Iraq wants to buy weapons from North Korea, does that mean we should go after Iraq? Especially after we gave Iraq weapons? Obviously Moore is stretching the truth, and it's no suprise, but he's not going to say something as rash as that without some sort of basis, exaggerated as it might be.

4.) So if you're arguing that the Saudi's don't like America, then why do they have hundreds of billions of dollars invested in this country? If you're arguing that the American government doesn't like the Saudi's then you're just wrong. More accurately, you're going to honor someone, like em or not, if they own 7% of America.

5.) It's a great job for them, until they die so that the upper and middle classes can prosper more easily.

6.) Obviously, if you're going to attack a country, you shouldn't do it half-assed, even if you're doing it for the wrong reasons. As for Afghanistan, it's not that we didn't have enough troops, it's that we didn't actually go after Bin Ladin. And that's what Bush said. Not to mention the 2 month head start we gave him.

7.) Everyone knows that Moore shaped every clip in that movie to say what he wanted it to say, so there's no sense in going on some Fox News show where he's pitted against four raging Republicans trying to pick apart every detail of his movie. And I don't believe your claim about him suing if someone insults him, simply because he wouldn't be able to. I'm sure Moore would be more than happy to justify his position on the subjects brought up in the movie.

Cliffs:

Moore is just as cowardly as you are (I don't see you on CNN defending your position to a bunch of biased democrats [that is if anyone cared what your position was])

Moore did more research than you.

You "sux0rz"

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoJoFine
WE DONT NEED ANY MORE TROOPS IN FSCKING AFGHANISTAN

Nope, we needed them all on 9/13, not now.
Old 07-14-2004, 09:00 PM gumplunger is offline  
Reply With Quote
#30  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:59 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.