IGX

Hey Bob it's cool...I just have a little man crush on TOM (Tough Old Man) and you know it's IGx style to start shit when there's no reason to. I figured that's what you meant but my estrogen level is a little high today.

DARTH wrote: Then it be worth it, especially since Obsama is pulling them out after getting more killed there than Bush. Tying our guys hands is pretty fucked up.

Always nice to be reminded in such vivid fashion that stupid will always be stupid.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

DARTH wrote: Then it be worth it, especially since Obsama is pulling them out after getting more killed there than Bush. Tying our guys hands is pretty fucked up.

Always nice to be reminded in such vivid fashion that stupid will always be stupid.

Well, the Afghanistan Surge was Obama's call. (And casualties roughly doubled.)
But who would be so cynical as to say Obama did the Surge solely for political reasons?

Oh, yeah, Robert Gates, Obama's Defense Secretary.

The Times reports Gates writing of a key meeting in the situation room during 2011, during which Obama expressed his doubts and concerns. “As I sat there,” Gates writes, “I thought: The president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy and doesn’t consider the war to be his.”

“For him,” Gates concluded, “it’s all about getting out.”

buzz

What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.

That's what I was getting at.

I have no problem with the US going to war after 9/11. I have problems with the conduct of the war.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:buzz

What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.

That's what I was getting at.

Which shows your a weak bellied faggot. You should not care, your not getting drafted.


It matters because while Bush was in the Press used a magnifying glass and would outright lie about what was going on.

They'd scream about casualties (of guys people in the press give fuck all about), even make up casualties (They lied about a situation a friend of mine was in, where no Marines died, just a bunch of rags and they reported several Marines were killed and more injured) yet they did not have anywhere near the gusto as soon as their Golden Islamo-Commie took over.

Talk to warfighters from there, the ROEs are ridiculous, right up to situations where Navy SEALs, instead of using the tactic they developed of sneaking into targets, right into buildings at night and slaughtering Talibunnies before they knew what hit them was changed to pulling up in HUMVs and having to yell into blowhorns to come out like they wee cops.

A friend who had to sit and watch 3 subhumans set up a mortor and were not allowed to kill them until a round left the tube, meaning they had to take their chances the round would not hit anyone before doing something about the threat.

That's Obama's fault. Bush is gone, many of us already have said enough about him.. being too weak kneed and caring about fags like you think and not letting the military fight those wars in a way that would have ended them quick and taking oil to pay for the shit.

But he did not make guys get fragged before they could shoot a fucking POS worth about $0.03.

Go watch Loose Change again and have a happy jerk off session.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:buzz

What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.

That's what I was getting at.

So I take it you primarily blame JFK for Vietnam?

johno wrote:I have no problem with the US going to war after 9/11. I have problems with the conduct of the war.

This. Drop the leash and get the fuck out of the way and don't stop until the job is done or don't send them.

It sickens me we could be ruthless against a European enemy in WW2 but treat Islamathals with kid gloves.

Turdacious wrote:

Yes I Have Balls wrote:buzz

What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.

That's what I was getting at.

So I take it you primarily blame JFK for Vietnam?

Naw, he'd blame Ike, gotta give Democrats a pass.

DARTH wrote:

johno wrote:I have no problem with the US going to war after 9/11. I have problems with the conduct of the war.

This. Drop the leash and get the fuck out of the way and don't stop until the job is done or don't send them.

It sickens me we could be ruthless against a European enemy in WW2 but treat Islamathals with kid gloves.

this is old news. we haven't fought a war since 1945. since then our military even in combat has merely been a political tool.

dems and repubs are both guilty.

dead man walking wrote:

DARTH wrote:

johno wrote:I have no problem with the US going to war after 9/11. I have problems with the conduct of the war.

This. Drop the leash and get the fuck out of the way and don't stop until the job is done or don't send them.

It sickens me we could be ruthless against a European enemy in WW2 but treat Islamathals with kid gloves.

this is old news. we haven't fought a war since 1945. since then our military even in combat has merely been a political tool.

dems and repubs are both guilty.

Although as the step son of a guy who was in a police action, he said "Felt like a war to me, seeing as they tried to kill me and I ended up in a hospital for half a year.

And that is one of the reasons Darth HATES pussyfooting, I've lived with one who had to foot some of the bill for that shit.

If the US can spend $6 trillion against guys in caves with their hands tied behind their back, I would love to see what would happen if they went full ballistic.

Do you realise how much our forces hold back and what they could do if they were unleashed?

A whole arsenal of non nuclear weapons are not used. Carpet bombing is not used. villages are not flattened, their families are not targeted unless they are in the middle of them, we did not call up the draft and go from a 2 million member armed forces to one reflecting our population by percentage in WW2.

Without Google Fu, I believe in WW2 we put 11million men in uniform, about a quarter of that being in combat arms with a population of 175million people. We are 320million now, so about 22-20million should have been put in uniform after 9-111-01, when this nation would have gone along with it.

We spent so damn much because of all the pussyfooting and all we did was ensure that eventually we will have to vaporise them all. Better to kill a few million than to have to kill a billion down the road and they might take a few million of us with them when shit gets to that point.



Iran is working on that kind of power. Give it 20 years or so.

DARTH wrote: A whole arsenal of non nuclear weapons are not used. Carpet bombing is not used. villages are not flattened, their families are not targeted unless they are in the middle of them, we did not call up the draft and go from a 2 million member armed forces to one reflecting our population by percentage in WW2.
Without Google Fu, I believe in WW2 we put 11million men in uniform, about a quarter of that being in combat arms with a population of 175million people. We are 320million now, so about 22-20million should have been put in uniform after 9-111-01, when this nation would have gone along with it.
We spent so damn much because of all the pussyfooting and all we did was ensure that eventually we will have to vaporise them all. Better to kill a few million than to have to kill a billion down the road and they might take a few million of us with them when shit gets to that point.

Hell yes I remember now why I read IGX.

#dontpussyfoot #TOTALWARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!! #darfforprez

How fucked up do you have to be to get turned down by the French Foreign Legion

Not very. They are very selective, have been since the German infusion of the late 40s early 50s.

Im glad an American is back home with his family (or soon anyway) The methods are not for me to decide nor is the rightness or wrongness of any actions that may have occurred. That good men died looking for him pisses me off more.

I believe that the U.S. should leave no man behind.

I believe that if the man leaves himself behind then the U.S. obligation is void.

-Stan

tough old man wrote:

How fucked up do you have to be to get turned down by the French Foreign Legion

Not very. They are very selective, have been since the German infusion of the late 40s early 50s.

T.O.M. do you think that the selection personnel could tell that he was mentally unstable by just talking and listening
to him or does the FFL administer written tests that check for red flags?

Its my understanding that he didnt get past the recruiting office which can sometimes be like "Fight Club" in the sense that you may have to show up several times a day and announce in French that you wish to join. It is apparently more this way if the Recruiting Officer is French or German.

The forming platoon phase can last up to a month. Thats where the testing is done, background checks, physical prep, and basic fitness prep. And cleaning, lots of cleaning. They called it slave platoon for a reason.

I haven't seen a fleecing like this since the Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Vikings.

VIetnam, Kennedy started it and LBJ completely fucked it up. We fought with two hands tied behind our backs

We lost 6000 people at Normandy. The press loved talking casualties when Bush was President.

Obama is a joke, can you believe he is speaking today? When Dianne Feinstein is pissed off at you, you really fucked up.
The worst foreign policy president of our lifetime. Putin thinks he's an assclown, Israel hates him, and now this.

Darth, everything you've said here is correct.

This AWOL deserter cost at least 6 American lives looking for him. They should court martial his ass and throw him in Leavenworth.

Bring all American Service members home that want to come home. However if they deserted or defected (happened in Korea) then the methods and manner of bringing them home can not be the same as a soldier captured on the battlefield.

Trading 5 Taliban Commanders for Berdahl was stupid. However, one would hope the CIA would be running some secret squirrel op to track these guys and use them to unravel terrorist networks.

The biggest mistake was holding this guy up as if he was some Hero. He's a dumb ass that got a lot of people killed with his stupidity and selfishness. It would have been better to send in a team to extract his dumb ass by force. There is some evidence or leaked suggestions we knew where the taliban was holding Bergahl. Yes, operators lives would have been at risk, but killing Taliban fucktards is or should be our main mission. Snatching back a dumbass deserter would have been a bonus.

I'm glad an American serviceman is home; even a stupid confused one. I'm upset at that we traded away so much and how he was held up as some hero.

Now that Berdahl is home, it's time to court martial him for desertion during a time of war.

BFly wrote:I haven't seen a fleecing like this since the Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Vikings.

This AWOL deserter cost at least 6 American lives looking for him. They should court martial his ass and throw him in Leavenworth.

jumping to conclusions, much? you and all the other premature ejaculators.

how do you know he was awol/deserter? some news reports? or testimony under oath?

why do you say he should go to leavenworth before there has even been an investigation first to determine whether he ought to be tried, and before a trial if there is to be one? does military justice not have a presumption of innocence?

as for being fleeced. john mccain was all for this trade a little while ago. then obama makes it, and everyone turns this sad mess into an opportunity to make political hay.

everyone's a fucking know-it-all, except people don't know the full story, but that's actually helpful, because then they can tell a story that suits their bias.

dead man walking wrote:

BFly wrote:I haven't seen a fleecing like this since the Cowboys traded Herschel Walker to the Vikings.

This AWOL deserter cost at least 6 American lives looking for him. They should court martial his ass and throw him in Leavenworth.

jumping to conclusions, much? you and all the other premature ejaculators.

how do you know he was awol/deserter? some news reports? or testimony under oath?

why do you say he should go to leavenworth before there has even been an investigation first to determine whether he ought to be tried, and before a trial if there is to be one? does military justice not have a presumption of innocence?

as for being fleeced. john mccain was all for this trade a little while ago. then obama makes it, and everyone turns this sad mess into an opportunity to make political hay.

everyone's a fucking know-it-all, except people don't know the full story, but that's actually helpful, because then they can tell a story that suits their bias.

They had 5 years to uncover at least the circumstances surrounding his capture. There was an investigation and it determined he most likely wandered away of his own volition. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ppearance/) It's not enough to determine if he should go to prison, but don't you think it's enough intelligence to decide his value as a military target? The exchange rate is now 1 questionable sergeant = 5 senior prisoners.

Are all POWs now worth that same exchange rate? Or is a decorated LT worth more than a questionable sergeant? How do you prioritize these kinds of missions if not by their value based on available intelligence?

Deadman, go back to jerking off to Rachel Maddow and leave the rest of it to us.

My beef is the fact that his cowardice cost other troops lives looking for him. How would you like to be the families of the troops that died?