Bombs Away

tetvet said:
The Problem IS we've been here done this before , the American people will not support another ,'nother mid east war , the U.S. is in darkness with no sign of light and not much sign of life , the battle for the middle east must be won in the U.S. .
Click to expand...


I have read a report that 70% of Americans want to do something about this.

These "individuals" are oprerating beyond the pale of human conduct. Everybody wants them dead....Sunnis, Shia, Chritians, they all hate this group.
 
To do something is very vague , I think everyone is aware that Air Strikes alone won't do it , your President is shucking an jiving as fast as he can , Ferguson here gay football player there , he can barely find time for golf , when he saw the oval office the other day he asked whose office this was .

To make these people dead you have to kill them and there will be a lot of collateral killing , ISIS will make sure plenty of so called innocent civilians dead and blame the collation on it
 
Last edited:
Thank god we have a joint chiefs of staff.

Dempsey has aready recommended boots on the ground....
 
Last edited:
Dempsey is a political animal who is in lock step with his CinC he looks good he looks like a take charge General , the one good General Obama had in his arsenal was McCrystal ( mis-spelled ) who knew what it would take to control the situation not to win the war which would be impossible but to have control over the out come .
 
tetvet said:
Dempsey is a political animal who is in lock step with his CinC he looks good he looks like a take charge General , the one good General Obama had in his arsenal was McCrystal ( mis-spelled ) who knew what it would take to control the situation not to win the war which would be impossible but to have control over the out come .
Click to expand...


I disagree

A day or two after Obama gave his nation speach Dempsey sat in front of congress saying we were going to need boots on the ground.

I'd call that a slap in the face.
 
So did most the generals that told Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld that we needed at least half a million for OIF....they were sent to pasture or retired shortly after. It doesn't matter what the JCS says, they still must work within the restrictions of the chain of command. If he was really convicted about poor leadership, he would resign in protest....at the same time he is a leader who is trying to do what he can with what he has....in good times and bad. Got no use for fair weather soldiers which is likely how he would view himself if he did resign...it is a vicious circle.
 
brinktk said:
So did most the generals that told Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld that we needed at least half a million for OIF....they were sent to pasture or retired shortly after. It doesn't matter what the JCS says, they still must work within the restrictions of the chain of command. If he was really convicted about poor leadership, he would resign in protest....at the same time he is a leader who is trying to do what he can with what he has....in good times and bad. Got no use for fair weather soldiers which is likely how he would view himself if he did resign...it is a vicious circle.
Click to expand...

I agree, he gave a no BS assesment to congress going against the president. He took it as far as he could without getting sacked.

Those were the soldiers I respected.
 
brinktk said:
So did most the generals that told Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld that we needed at least half a million for OIF....they were sent to pasture or retired shortly after. It doesn't matter what the JCS says, they still must work within the restrictions of the chain of command. If he was really convicted about poor leadership, he would resign in protest....at the same time he is a leader who is trying to do what he can with what he has....in good times and bad. Got no use for fair weather soldiers which is likely how he would view himself if he did resign...it is a vicious circle.
Click to expand...

brinkth didn't you indicate the US - Coalition had Iraq ~ stabilized with the coalition troop strength troop strength that was available? "After desert storm", this stayed at ~ 150,000 troops from (2004 to 2011)? Not including Kurds and US trained Iraq's.
The reason I mention this is would 1/2 million troops be overkill or would it have made much difference?
One thing that likely would have helped greatly would have been positive media coverage for our troops, I'm sure you know what I mean here.
Note: with the present policies in Washington I don't think we could send 1/2 million troops even if we wanted to.
 
JOC said:
brinkth didn't you indicate the US - Coalition had Iraq ~ stabilized with the coalition troop strength troop strength that was available? "After desert storm", this stayed at ~ 150,000 troops from (2004 to 2011)? Not including Kurds and US trained Iraq's.
The reason I mention this is would 1/2 million troops be overkill or would it have made much difference?
One thing that likely would have helped greatly would have been positive media coverage for our troops, I'm sure you know what I mean here.
Note: with the present policies in Washington I don't think we could send 1/2 million troops even if we wanted to.
Click to expand...

It was out of control until the sunni awakening. We didn't have enough troops and the "surge" was only about 40,000 more troops who would focus on Baghdad. The surge would have failed and the civil war would have grown to new heights had we not changed our strategy and AQI not worn out their welcome, forcing the desert sheiks to come to our side. Also, at the same time the shia militias agreed to stand down and try to give the the ISF a chance, giving former insurgents amnesty and be allowed to police their own neighborhoods through the sons of Iraq program, and a lot of luck. If any one of these things didn't happen it would have descended further into chaos. Yes, we eventually were able to wrest control WITH the Iraqi Army and Police fighting right beside us. It's more complicated than that and I will elaborate more later, unfortunately the valium is kicking in and I'm not 100% at the moment intellectually.

To be continued....
 
tetvet said:
I need to clarified one comment I made when I referred to the company that was the nume de plume of the CIA .
Click to expand...

I knew that you were refereeing to the fact that Thieu was a Washington yes man. He was also terribly corrupt.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top