More troops to Iraq/Middle East: discuss!

[PotenzaSub]

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

Wonder why so many people are dying, Iraqi citizens included? Our own media is publishing the location and troop strength of units, and well as daily unit planning....talk about a setup - how about we keep our plans secret like we should? All the bad guys have to do is read the paper or watch the news....and they know who is coming for them and when.

I totally agree. The media needs to keep its mouth shut when it comes to intel like that. It pisses me off every time I hear that some new piece of information was leaked to the media - whether its troop locations or even things the president will say in an upcoming speech.

[ketchup!]

i seriously think Bush is one of the worst presidents of all time

[wrx_snobordr]

Originally Posted by civicboy18974

i seriously think Bush is one of the worst presidents of all time

Im going to go out on a limb here and assume you think Clinton was one of the greatest of all time?

[PotenzaSub]

Originally Posted by civicboy18974

i seriously think Bush is one of the worst presidents of all time

Oh, please elaborate.

[poolmike]

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

The problem is that not many people here have any actual knowledge of the real scenarios over there, and I seriously doubt we have any combat veterans, whether enlisted or officer, here on the forum, besides me and one other guy I know.

Add to that impressionable young folks here on the forum, force fed loads of crap from a seriously left-leaning media, who would rather report negative issues all day to pump ratings (ratings = profit) than truly support the forces in place by NOT giving out troop numbers, equipment used, troop movements, etc - the media has somehow assumed that things we used to classify and are now "for official use only" can be dispersed to anyone.

Inexperience + misinformation + lack of maturity = ignorance, jumping to conclusions, and anarchist attitudes.

Wonder why so many people are dying, Iraqi citizens included? Our own media is publishing the location and troop strength of units, and well as daily unit planning....talk about a setup - how about we keep our plans secret like we should? All the bad guys have to do is read the paper or watch the news....and they know who is coming for them and when.

From a 3-times wounded, and Silver Star/2 Purple Hearts/5 AF Commendation Medal-awarded combat veteran, I'm offended at some misinformed remarks I'm seeing, but this is a free forum, and a free country. You're free to speak your mind as needed, and I'm free to be offended that many have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to the military.

Lots of Monday morning quarterbacks....just like some members of Congress, and many members of the press...thinking they could handle things better. I'll call BS on that one in a heartbeat.

You can't criticize what you have no knowledge or understanding of.

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

One other thing - our troops are being held to Geneva Convention standards and are being called "brutal" - problem is, these "insurgents", but heck, let's just call them what they area - "terrorists" - ARE NOT enemy combatants deserving of Geneva Convention standards and treatment. They do not wear uniforms, nor do they even recognize the Geneva Convention Summit Agreement of 1947....yet our troops have their hands tied in dealing with them while the bad guys build bombs that detonate on the side of the road...also against the Convention standards....

How about some fairness here? Our own people, including our media and the ACLU, attack our troops for the way they act in combat, but would NEVER consider joining them, nor do they consider the brutal and unethical behavior of the enemy.

Sorry, guys, struck a nerve here, and no, I didn't listen to W's speech.

^^What Jim said^^ I agree. I don't usually believe the nonsense the media feeds me everyday. I DO believe my friends who are serving in Iraq.

[JSeoul]

I've read majority of all the posts on here and I think this thread is a great discussion. I just want to say I support Bush and him wanting to send more troops over there. Many of my friends have stated that they are always outnumbered at the camps between them with the Iraqi's and all the threats that are infront of them.

[ITSTOCK]

I had a long post typed up, but after scanning through, this one answers the question MUCH MUCH MUCH better....

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

The problem is that not many people here have any actual knowledge of the real scenarios over there, and I seriously doubt we have any combat veterans, whether enlisted or officer, here on the forum, besides me and one other guy I know.

Add to that impressionable young folks here on the forum, force fed loads of crap from a seriously left-leaning media, who would rather report negative issues all day to pump ratings (ratings = profit) than truly support the forces in place by NOT giving out troop numbers, equipment used, troop movements, etc - the media has somehow assumed that things we used to classify and are now "for official use only" can be dispersed to anyone.

Inexperience + misinformation + lack of maturity = ignorance, jumping to conclusions, and anarchist attitudes.

Wonder why so many people are dying, Iraqi citizens included? Our own media is publishing the location and troop strength of units, and well as daily unit planning....talk about a setup - how about we keep our plans secret like we should? All the bad guys have to do is read the paper or watch the news....and they know who is coming for them and when.

From a 3-times wounded, and Silver Star/2 Purple Hearts/5 AF Commendation Medal-awarded combat veteran, I'm offended at some misinformed remarks I'm seeing, but this is a free forum, and a free country. You're free to speak your mind as needed, and I'm free to be offended that many have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to the military.

Lots of Monday morning quarterbacks....just like some members of Congress, and many members of the press...thinking they could handle things better. I'll call BS on that one in a heartbeat.

You can't criticize what you have no knowledge or understanding of.

Add to that what happened to other wars when we ended up fighting "political" wars, and nothing good can come from pulling out all, or any troops. The only GOOD answer is MORE troops.

[streetAssasin96]

I definitley agree with alot that was said here, and some great points were made, but what urks me is when you have a full house of Democrats that want to cut funding to those toops that are risking their lives. Not to metion, they want to spend that money on the failing public education systems in the U.S, now i think thats rediculous. Yeh lets take money from those who are already living in sh!tty wartime conditions, because they are merely representing our country, and getting in a way criticised for it. For example when soldiers die, and there are those dickless bastards that go and protest at their funerals, that sh!t blows my mind.

[Ronin Tactical]

The Freedom of Information Act, pushed hard by the ACLU in the past 25-30 years, has taken previously secretive information about our military and made it available to the press.

I entered the military 25 years ago at the ripe, young age of 18. At that time, if you discusssed, with a civilian, the number of people in your unit or the exact types of weapons you carry at work, you'd go to jail.

In fact, when I was stationed in Greece, I had my security clearance temporarily revoked because someone heard I was dating a girl from Yugoslavia. I was, but it was after we'd "committed" to the relationship that I found out exactly where she was from - I was ordered to cease and desist with her. Times have changed a lot in the past 20-25 years, and it sucks for the security of our troops, and now, more than ever, a bunch of unqualified, inexperienced people are throwing out opinions about things they haven't a clue on, simply because of the goofy presentation of the "facts" in the media.

You want to get into Bush vs Clinton? This isn't about Bill's blow jobs and W's lack of speaking ability. Bill was handed Bin laden on a silver platter by non other than Khadaffy (of Libya), and didn't take him. During Clinton's reign, the Seals and Deltas were never more fully staffed, we had all the intel we needed to go get bad guys, and Clinton never pulled the trigger.

So, what happened? 3,100 people at 9/11, 212 on the USS Cole, unknown hundreds in an embassy in Africa, 326 in a resort in Bali....all died. That's not touching on the horrible mess in Kosovo and Bosnia, also "handled" by Clinton.

And you guys say W is bad....please.

Whomever it was who said that the President has total authority in time of war was wrong, also. Everything still goes through Congress, and the President signs off on things that are recommended by Congressmen and generals, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I doubt, seriously, that ANY President has ever had an original thought and pushed it through when it comes to war - there's too many checks and balances, and too many other people involved in the decision making process.

[Raven18940]

So the only way out is to get in deeper first. Damn it this sucks. But when is the media releasing troop movements, I've never seen that.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

One other thing - our troops are being held to Geneva Convention standards and are being called "brutal" - problem is, these "insurgents", but heck, let's just call them what they area - "terrorists" - ARE NOT enemy combatants deserving of Geneva Convention standards and treatment. They do not wear uniforms, nor do they even recognize the Geneva Convention Summit Agreement of 1947....yet our troops have their hands tied in dealing with them while the bad guys build bombs that detonate on the side of the road...also against the Convention standards....

How about some fairness here? Our own people, including our media and the ACLU, attack our troops for the way they act in combat, but would NEVER consider joining them, nor do they consider the brutal and unethical behavior of the enemy.

Sorry, guys, struck a nerve here, and no, I didn't listen to W's speech.

bingo, and if i wasnt the other guy you knew you know me now

[igo4bmx]

Originally Posted by wrx_snobordr

Im going to go out on a limb here and assume you think Clinton was one of the greatest of all time?

Dude he was PIMP

[Intercooled T]

I'm not even going to start with this, it's too frustrating to reason with some people on this board. Let's just pray when John McCain comes into office he will do what is in the troops and the iraqi people's best interest. I'm sure he will.

[Raven18940]

As much as you conservatives may hate Clinton, he was damn good at not pissing off the whole world and an amazing public speaker.

Originally Posted by Intercooled T

I'm not even going to start with this, it's too frustrating to reason with some people on this board. Let's just pray when John McCain comes into office he will do what is in the troops and the iraqi people's best interest. I'm sure he will.

If the republicans run McCain I will vote for him. He's a sharp man and is willing to say and do the unpopular things when needed.

[wrx_snobordr]

Originally Posted by Jim Lewis

The Freedom of Information Act, pushed hard by the ACLU in the past 25-30 years, has taken previously secretive information about our military and made it available to the press.

I entered the military 25 years ago at the ripe, young age of 18. At that time, if you discusssed, with a civilian, the number of people in your unit or the exact types of weapons you carry at work, you'd go to jail.

In fact, when I was stationed in Greece, I had my security clearance temporarily revoked because someone heard I was dating a girl from Yugoslavia. I was, but it was after we'd "committed" to the relationship that I found out exactly where she was from - I was ordered to cease and desist with her. Times have changed a lot in the past 20-25 years, and it sucks for the security of our troops, and now, more than ever, a bunch of unqualified, inexperienced people are throwing out opinions about things they haven't a clue on, simply because of the goofy presentation of the "facts" in the media.

You want to get into Bush vs Clinton? This isn't about Bill's blow jobs and W's lack of speaking ability. Bill was handed Bin laden on a silver platter by non other than Khadaffy (of Libya), and didn't take him. During Clinton's reign, the Seals and Deltas were never more fully staffed, we had all the intel we needed to go get bad guys, and Clinton never pulled the trigger.

So, what happened? 3,100 people at 9/11, 212 on the USS Cole, unknown hundreds in an embassy in Africa, 326 in a resort in Bali....all died. That's not touching on the horrible mess in Kosovo and Bosnia, also "handled" by Clinton.

And you guys say W is bad....please.

Whomever it was who said that the President has total authority in time of war was wrong, also. Everything still goes through Congress, and the President signs off on things that are recommended by Congressmen and generals, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I doubt, seriously, that ANY President has ever had an original thought and pushed it through when it comes to war - there's too many checks and balances, and too many other people involved in the decision making process.

I agree with you on teh Clinton thing. Dude really didnt do much of anything besides ride the coat tails of the internet boom. He cut military spending and due to the rapid growth of the economey (and some tax increases)we got out of the debt...nothing was of his doing, it actually started back with Reagan. I always got a kick out of Clinton handling anything with the military though since he himself was a legitimate draft dodger.

I was the one who said he has full power. However, I didnt mean it as he was a dictator and everything he wants will be done. But, in regards to the statement made by another member "this wont happen its a Democrat congress, they will just pull the troops out". He is still the commander, yes, congress can have a vote and go on record to say they disagree with him sending in more troops but if he, meaning his staff and advisors, choose to send more troops the only recorse congress has to stop him is to stop the flow of funds. he cant do ANYTHING he wants, but if he wants to move troops around to my knowledge they cant stop him.

As far as the whole Iraq thing I am done discussing it. I have no idea what strategy will work, top military personel cant even come to an agreement. A part of me feels we have a responsibility to be there and wait utnil order is restored. However, another part of me thinks the military did its job, they ousted a dictator and gave that country its first fee election. Due to that they should be handling their own security, not the US military.

We went in with a noble cause however no amount of military force nor one free election can change a way of life ingrained for hundreds of years. Different sects of islam have been fighting since the begining of that religon, we cant stop that. We may be able to secure the cities while we are there, but once we leave they will eventually begin fighting again. but then there is the question of if we leave are we inviting terrorists to come to our country and fight us here instead of in Iraq. Who knows....

[revenant]

Whomever it was who said that the President has total authority in time of war was wrong, also. Everything still goes through Congress, and the President signs off on things that are recommended by Congressmen and generals, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I doubt, seriously, that ANY President has ever had an original thought and pushed it through when it comes to war - there's too many checks and balances, and too many other people involved in the decision making process.

I agree totally. The President is just making decisions based on what information "his people" give or influence him to make.

[wrx_snobordr]

Originally Posted by Raven18940

As much as you conservatives may hate Clinton, he was damn good at not pissing off the whole world and an amazing public speaker.

If the republicans run McCain I will vote for him. He's a sharp man and is willing to say and do the unpopular things when needed.

Thats because he was a poll president, he did what would offend the least amount of people. Its also hard to offend enemies when he is giving them our nuclear secrets... you know, giving china a nuclear reactor.

I want RUDY! ha ha

[Intercooled T]

Originally Posted by Raven18940

If the republicans run McCain I will vote for him. He's a sharp man and is willing to say and do the unpopular things when needed.

You can bet they will and he will win. The ONLY, and i repeat ONLY way he can lose is if a third-party steals the vote, like Ross Perot. Perot was the reason Clinton beat Bush Sr.....I sure hope something like that wouldn't happen again, when the better candidate loses by default

[Raven18940]

Originally Posted by wrx_snobordr

Its also hard to offend enemies when he is giving them our nuclear secrets... you know, giving china a nuclear reactor.

What does it matter when China has had nuclear weapons since the mid 60s.

[wrx_snobordr]

Originally Posted by Raven18940

What does it matter when China has had nuclear weapons since the mid 60s.

Yeah, he just gave them the power to make them smaller more powerful and in greater numbers... cool!