The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[unofan]

and so the war on terror takes a hiatus while we go to war with each other instead.....



Frankly, I find it breathtakingly hypocritical for people to get all worked up about a so-called "war on women" inside the US when those same people are totally silent about the real-life atrocities inflicted upon women in some Muslim countries. How outrageous to ask for a woman to pay for her own birth control! Oh, the horror! yet clitorectomies are given a complete pass. Women who are caught committing adultery have stones thrown at them until they keel over dead. no big deal. we have to understand how those men are working through years of western oppression.


I guess I'm just old-fashioned.

No, you're just disingenuous.

I dare you to find anyone on this board that says any of that is ok.

But that doesn't mean it makes war halfway around the world an acceptable option in response. Unless we're willing to go full Pax Romana (good luck with that), the simple reality is there are going to be bad things in the world that we can't do anything about. That also doesn't mean we should stop remedying lesser things that we can deal with at home.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

No, you're just disingenuous.

But have't you heard? If you don't jump every time JPod says jump, you love the terrorists and hate 'Murica.

FF and Pio are daily reminders that the people who brought us Iraq didn't learn a thing. They're never going to get it, and no matter how much misery they bring it will always be somebody else's fault. An ideology can never fail, it can only be failed.

[joecct]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think we did the same thing 50 years ago. Look where it got us..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...ml?tid=HP_lede

If, heaven forbid, we do get involved in a land war, we need to fight it differently with little management from Washington

[Jimjamesak]

No one said it was, Patrick Henry. But it is anti-American to display the flags of our enemies (sop during Vietnam anti-war demonstrations), to root for a North Vietnamese victory and to travel to the capital city of our enemies to collaborate with them. Hanoi Jane was neither the first nor the only in that regard, just the most famous.

I've already served on active duty and am a little too old to do so again. So I'm not entirely certain where "chicken hawk" is coming from except from an inability to argue intelligently.

You'd be better off sharing your concerns about American ground troops with the Community Organizer in Chief, since he seems unable to make up his mind.

So us not wanting to send troops to Iraq means we were waving North Vietnamese flags in 1970? Ok... Beyond the fact I wasn't born until 1985 I don't see any of us wishing our country loses, traveling to Iraq (or Vietnam for that matter), or wishing for our troops to die. In fact I think we want the opposite.
Well crazy is sometimes best countered with crazy so here's a pony:

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

By your own admission weren't you a desk jockey stateside when the shooting was going on? There's nothing wrong with that mind you as my own father did the same, but it doesn't qualify you as an expert on military affairs any more than it did him.

PS - Whatever they're paying the orderlies on your ward, it can't nearly be enough.

The only service about which you're an expert is bringing your customers their Grand Slams.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

So us not wanting to send troops to Iraq means we were waving North Vietnamese flags in 1970? Ok... Beyond the fact I wasn't born until 1985 I don't see any of us wishing our country loses, traveling to Iraq (or Vietnam for that matter), or wishing for our troops to die. In fact I think we want the opposite.
Well crazy is sometimes best countered with crazy so here's a pony:

I'm trying to decide whether anyone could really be as stupid, ignorant and superficial as this post indicates.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

and so the war on terror takes a hiatus while we go to war with each other instead.....



Frankly, I find it breathtakingly hypocritical for people to get all worked up about a so-called "war on women" inside the US when those same people are totally silent about the real-life atrocities inflicted upon women in some Muslim countries. How outrageous to ask for a woman to pay for her own birth control! Oh, the horror! yet clitorectomies are given a complete pass. Women who are caught committing adultery have stones thrown at them until they keel over dead. no big deal. we have to understand how those men are working through years of western oppression.


I guess I'm just old-fashioned.

Or to work themselves into a lather about Clarence Thomas but issue a lifetime pass for that Arky p.o.s. Bill Clinton.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

But have't you heard? If you don't jump every time JPod says jump, you love the terrorists and hate 'Murica.

FF and Pio are daily reminders that the people who brought us Iraq didn't learn a thing. They're never going to get it, and no matter how much misery they bring it will always be somebody else's fault. An ideology can never fail, it can only be failed.

This, so much this.

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Perhaps you're quoting the general incorrectly. Perhaps he's an idiot. It's hard to tell. "Making no more veterans" would mean eliminating the millions of opportunities taken advantage of by young people for generations to improve their educational and fiscal standards. Maybe he meant "combat" veterans. Maybe you don't know the difference. Maybe we should just do away the DOD altogether. That would certainly eliminate future PTSD and traumatic blast injury cases.

I find it funny you go through the trouble of using "" to "quote" me but change the wording and defeat a strawman. Good work.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

But have't you heard? If you don't jump every time JPod says jump, you love the terrorists and hate 'Murica.

FF and Pio are daily reminders that the people who brought us Iraq didn't learn a thing. They're never going to get it, and no matter how much misery they bring it will always be somebody else's fault. An ideology can never fail, it can only be failed.

"Somebody else's fault?" From one of the principal soloists in the Amen Chorus that six years into the Cheap Suit's administration is still blaming Bush. . .for everything? You got guts, I'll give you that. I assume if this war (no, it's not a war) against ISIS goes south, you'll have the familiar denunciations of Bush and Neocons handy.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I find it funny you go through the trouble of using "" to "quote" me but change the wording and defeat a strawman. Good work.

It's possible I misread what you wrote. Did you or did you not quote the general as saying the best way to honor veterans is to make sure we make no more of them? And if that's what he said, he's an imbecile. And if he meant (as I suspect) no more wounded vets, then you're an imbecile. Either way, to make absolutely certain no more GIs are ever hurt (we've recently lost some pilots in accidents) is to do away with DOD altogether.

[Rover]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

The only service about which you're an expert is bringing your customers their Grand Slams.

Opie I'm 99.9% sure I could buy and sell you six days a week and twice on Sunday despite being half your age, so I'm not sure a contest measuring success (or measuring anything else...) is in your best interests.

Also - Try to base some of your arguments as if you were dealing with people who were born after Vietnam ended, 'kay? Because this Hanoi Jane and Abbie Hoffman stuff just makes you look like a dinosaur.

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

"We can best honor veterans by trying hard to make no more of them."

It's possible I misread what you wrote. Did you or did you not quote the general as saying the best way to honor veterans is to make sure we make no more of them? And if that's what he said, he's an imbecile. And if he meant (as I suspect) no more wounded vets, then you're an imbecile. Either way, to make absolutely certain no more GIs are ever hurt (we've recently lost some pilots in accidents) is to do away with DOD altogether.

I am no humanities major but I think "trying hard" vs, as you changed it, "must" or "make sure" have very different meanings. Especially in a nuanced issue like armed conflicts and their consequences.

Although you clearly appear to be an expert in every military subject, I personally would yield to his expertise and experience. Granted I am making the assumption that you are far less experienced with dealing with "wounded" veterans than he. I think this assumption is warranted, however, given that he has 30+ years of experience in rehabilitation medicine within the military and you string sentences and slurs together like a drunk Clint Eastwood.

I would also add that most "wounds" veterans suffer from are not visible. Those who dedicate their lives to healing those wounds try to stress the careful thinking needed before exposing more men and women to those conditions.

[burd]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Opie I'm 99.9% sure I could buy and sell you six days a week and twice on Sunday despite being half your age, so I'm not sure a contest measuring success (or measuring anything else...) is in your best interests.

Also - Try to base some of your arguments as if you were dealing with people who were born after Vietnam ended, 'kay? Because this Hanoi Jane and Abbie Hoffman stuff just makes you look like a dinosaur.

Rover, you can be half Pio's age and still be a relic.

It's true, Pio's age is magnified because he hasn't accepted a new idea since hula hoops. There is no WD-40 for a mind that rusted shut.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I am no humanities major but I think "trying hard" vs, as you changed it, "must" or "make sure" have very different meanings. Especially in a nuanced issue like armed conflicts and their consequences.

Although you clearly appear to be an expert in every military subject, I personally would yield to his expertise and experience. Granted I am making the assumption that you are far less experienced with dealing with "wounded" veterans than he. I think this assumption is warranted, however, given that he has 30+ years of experience in rehabilitation medicine within the military and you string sentences and slurs together like a drunk Clint Eastwood.

I would also add that most "wounds" veterans suffer from are not visible. Those who dedicate their lives to healing those wounds try to stress the careful thinking needed before exposing more men and women to those conditions.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Hide behind the general's credentials all you want. But the vets he deals with are the ones who are damaged in one way or another. Not the vast majority who aren't. And slather on a layer of boiler plate for good measure. But you were ignorantly imprecise and too childishly stubborn to admit it.