Why do you have to go there with this incendiary low blow nonsense type stuff? What good does that do? I have several relatives who have served and even retired from the military so really just save it.
You think killing terrorists would solve the problem of terrorism? The war on terror is a joke to be the remedy of terrorism. Violence either alliviates or aggravates the condition depends on situation. It isn't a cure in the first place, not a sure cure by any means. Terrorism is a mental desease. In case you simpletons don't get it: Killing AIDS infected men don't get rid of AIDS virus itself. Killing terrorists don't get rid of terrorism itself. If you still don't get it, ask me in five years why Al Queda is still there.
In matters of current military engagements, I will take Treeman over Macbeth every time. In matters of historical battles, give me MacBeth. Treeman is more current and closer to real knowledge then most people on this BBS, espeically someone who is teaching at a college in Canada. DD
You must have me confused with some other horde on this board. This from the kinder gentler giddy who opined about his mischievous past and vowed to change his dastardly ways. That lasted like what, a week? Alrighty.
Really? hmmmm...What post did you read? I read the one where he attributed a positve to negative ratio on our actions in Iraq, and an assesment of their effect on the lives of Iraqis... "Our activities there are overwhelmingly positive, yet everything reported from there is negative. At least a 85% positive to 15% negative ratio, and yet the media can only report the bad. Well, for every attack on our troops or every attack on the Iraqis' future, there are at least ten major projects that improve Iraqis' lives every day." ...an evaluation of the media's agenda..."Strangely, when we really start winning against the insurgents (already happening) you will just stop hearing about Iraq so much, because the media has already developed a theme which prohibits them from reporting everything positive that is going on. " ...an estimation of the racial content of the opposition to the US whic supposes that the intel reported is counterfactual, as well as a statement of fact about former Iraqi policy... "The attacks in Iraq are being carried out by Baathist remnants and (increasingly) Al Qaeda activists. This in combination with any damn Palestinian who feels like martyring himself (Palestinians were always Saddam's favorites). " ...an assesment of the date of completion for this engagement, complete with supporting statements of military history, the cultural and political makeup of the opposition, and an overall evaluation of our own future policies and potential options within the action in question..." We will win this guerilla war within the next year. This is not like earlier conflicts for a number of reasons: A) the enemy has a very limited base of popular support (almost none), a vital requirement for any insurgency; B) they have a limited materiel supply (weapons, ammo, cash, etc); C) the opposing army - us - is already controlling their property, and they have no industrial or financial base of support; D) political momentum resides with us, despite what you hear coming from the UN; E) We have future logistical options in the form of both NGOs and our own internal military and political structure, while the enemies do not..." ...and second to last, and most clearly, an evaluation of the war as it relates to the policy of War on Terror, with conclusions of how and if it relates..." One year. More like a couple of months... And the positive here: Al Qaeda can't send martyrs to Iraq fast enough. We are killing the bad guys at a rate we couldn't hope to match in Afghanistan. We've goaded the otherwise would-be bus-bombers and boxcutter-weilding fanatics to attack our army in another country instead of attacking our civilians inside our own. We are killing Islamic fanatics at unheard of rates there (although it won't make the nightly news)... That in itself is a massive coup-de-grace in the War on Terror. And anyone who thought that this was separate from the WoT can classify themselfes as Wrong, Wrong, and extremely Wrong for the past year and a half. It has always been central to that effort. This transformation, as well as the battleground it produces, has always been the centerpiece in that war." ....and finally a conclusion given about the WMDs, with a partisan politica shot thrown in for good measure..." The WMD are still there. They didn't just friggen dissolve into thin air, as some Democrats would have you believe. They will be found. And when they are I will be back to vanquish the No Worries virus once and for all. It is just a matter of time. centrifuge... " Now maybe this all strikes you, johnheath, as not being analysis, but to the layman like myself it sounds pretty darn close. Possibly you were reffering to another post of treemans? Or maybe you were just joking? No, wait....that's T_J's out. About the whole pride/ego thingine that you guys are on about, let's review... treeman writes a post stating his opinion as fact, more power to him, because he is entitled, and is not part of this aspect of the discussion...several pro-war posters respond by praising tree as by far the most knowledgable and accurate poster on this subject not, it would seem, because he agress with them lockstep, but because he is guarding a depot somewhere. I disagree with the contention that serving as a non-com in another part of the world has anything to do with the discussion, furhter know of countelss examples thus far where tree has been wrong, and post same while not once mentioning myslef or my area of study. Just a refutation of the premise in and of itself. T_J responds by challenging and insulting my profession, I respond by defending it, and I am called egotistical and proud...incredible. So it would seem that my options were either concede the point about tree even though it's wrong, or if I was so pig headed as to insist on refuting that, to accept T_J's insult/challenge about my profession without argument, lest I be called an egomaniac. Interesting.
Nope. You've got another option, MacBeth. Ignore the dummies. Ignore the ones who have proven time and again they change the rules of debate as often as they lose. Try it, man. It's working great for me. I've finally realized you never get to actually ever have a debate in the debate forum, but what's new. Since Max stopped actually participating, since Refman disappeared and considering that HayesStreet is a rare presence here, what's the point in arguing? Mr. Clutch is still around and he's worth a spar. giddyup's heart's in the right place for arguing but he's totally obsessed with the party line, so whether you're willing to admit fault on your side or not, you know he never will. And the ones who dominate the right wing side here absolutely (and even proudly) refuse to even acknowledge when things they've sworn were right are absolutely, indisputably proven to be wrong. In fact they almost pretend they never said them. They just skip on to defending the next bogus party line. So what's the point? I'm down to posting articles and talking about the primaries. And, even there, I know better (finally) than to be drawn into a discussion with people who don't know how to have a debate or even an argument. It's a shame. We used to have some good talks on these boards. I've eaten crow here many a time. But when the other side refuses to admit they're wrong -- when they refuse to admit they've even said wrong things -- and when the search feature's down to boot, why even bother. It's a shame but facts are facts. And you know that good old definition of insanity. Don't go insane. Just announce victory like those lesser ones do (the difference would be you'd actually be right) and admit that this forum's dead. There are suicide bombers here and they have suicided it. No big deal. I'm here for Rockets stuff anyway. I liked it when we had good talks here and I'll like it if we did again, but the right wing guys who actually debated are long, long gone. I'd advise you just let it go. After all, we'll have our good old time in November next year. And I couldn't care less what the folks who ruined the D&D have to say about it. They'll surely have another stupid spin, but we'll all have a new president. That'll be good enough for me.
I've always been kind and gentle. I have neither a mischevious past nor a dastardly way. You liken American soldiers in a situatioin of war to gossiping schoolgirls with rumors. Sorry if I missed the kudos....
Don't confuse or mistake a lack of a response by a conservative to the left wing's typical lunacy as being 'proven to be wrong.' I set my own rules around here. I am Trader_Jorge.
i'm participating...and i listen to what you say..i disagree with a lot of it...but i listen. having said that, there are things that concern me with the current administration. i've been disappointed in many ways...and yet there are things i really like about the president. believe it or not, i'll read about dean with an open mind...ultimately the abortion thing is way huge for me, though...makes it very hard for me to vote for any democrat candidate, though I do understand there is a pro-life democrat group, as well. i'm just not sure you'd ever get a pro-life dem on the national ticket. hey, i voted for clinton before..anything is possible! but put up hillary, and there's no way i vote for her...absolutely no way. im not particularly interested in any of the other dem candidates either. EDIT: Dean backs partial-birth abortion. See how quickly I lose interest! I just can't stomach that...the same way some of you said you couldn't vote for a Democrat who voted to support the war in Iraq.
Yeah whatever, that's exactly what I said. Complete with gum smacking and hair tossing analogies. Apparently you're unable to grasp the concept of human nature which doesn't exist if you're a "military man" because they get everything right all the time and of course are never gung ho or come to incorrect conclusions. Goooood Bless Amerrrrrica, land that I looooove....
To date, 282 brave American soldiers have given the ultimate sacrifice in this War on Terror in Iraq. How's that for human nature?
You may not have a mischievous past or a dastardly way, but you have to be one of the most melodramatic posters here.
I know you are, Max. You've just been a little less engaged in controversial topics (mostly Iraq) than in the pre-D&D days. I think it started when you took your break. I don't fault you that at all -- I'm kind of trying to follow your lead -- but I sometimes miss the level of debate some of us used to enjoy. It got overheated at times, but there was at least an attempt to be respectful and correct for the heat and there was at least an attempt at accountability in those discussions. That's just not possible with some of the loudest voices here and, while I can be as loud as anyone, it's no fun with people who scream "victory" loudest when they lose, who scream FACT over and over again, disappear as soon as the 'facts' are proven false and come back to start the whole silly process over again. Anybody remember exactly how many times the anti-war crowd was supposed to sit down, shut up and hide heads in shame on account of WMD's definitely, for sure being found? Being generous, and with the search function (as well as my interest in searching) off, I'd say it was more than five times. Each of the stories proved false and each was replaced with another shameless, false story accompanied with the usual instructions to shut up or renounce our citizenship. The thing is, you wouldn't do that, Ref wouldn't do that, HayesStreet doesn't do that and Mr. Clutch doesn't do that. But you guys don't speak for the right here anymore. The BBS version of your party's been taken over by insane, radical "comedians." Incidentally, I don't need you to vote against Bush to respect your positions. I completely understand and respect your issues with abortion and would never expect you to vote for a pro-choice candidate. I know you're a reasonable guy though and it's got to be a serious drag to have to vote for the pro-life position's present standard bearer. Even so, if I were you I'd do it too.
giddyup, Timing has not dismissed them. That is drama. He has criticized their boss who put them in this bad situation for bad (almost certainly cynical) reasons. Don't mistake blindly saluting that boss with honoring the troops. That is melodrama.
MacBeth, this is *exactly* why people think you are egotistical. You think that your qualifications make you not only an informed opinion on the war, but a supremely informed opinion, capable of challenging even the opinion of people on the front lines. Many posters in this thread have pointed out how your book reading is less significant than Treeman's actual military experience. Very few will disagree with this. You think that people's comparison of you versus treeman is based solely on your respective qualifications. You do not for one moment think that the quality of your posts could have anything to do with their opinions. Treeman's posts on the war are *far* more substantive than your theoretical ramblings. It's not even close. For you to not be able to see this implies that you are blinded by your super-sized ego.
