Yes, the only thing the left hates more than Israel; General David Petraeus.ATG wrote:
Hated by the drooling idiots on the left for no apparent reason.
Don't you mean Saudi Arabia?Turquoise wrote:
We really just need to get the fuck out of Afghanistan. McChrystal's remarks might have gotten him fired, but I don't doubt that his own feelings on the occupation are accurate.
If they cause us any further problems, just nuke the fuckers. The same goes for Pakistan.
Then send Tony Hayward into the nuclear wasteland to get the oil.Fynnegin wrote:
How 'bout the whole Middle East?
lulz, American counter insurgency tactics...Poseidon wrote:
Engineered the surge. Pretty much the father of modern counter-insurgency tactics.
Guy's awesome and a decorated war hero.
Worked well for Iraq.Vilham wrote:
lulz, American counter insurgency tactics...Poseidon wrote:
Engineered the surge. Pretty much the father of modern counter-insurgency tactics.
Guy's awesome and a decorated war hero.
Perhaps he is.Cybargs wrote:
Worked well for Iraq.Vilham wrote:
lulz, American counter insurgency tactics...Poseidon wrote:
Engineered the surge. Pretty much the father of modern counter-insurgency tactics.
Guy's awesome and a decorated war hero.
So pretty much they demoted the guy from commander of CENTCOM to running Afghanistan =/ Or is he running EVERYTHING now?
Saudi Arabia is pretty shitty, but we can actually work with them somewhat functionally unlike with Pakistan, and it appears that Afghanistan is a lost cause.Dilbert_X wrote:
Don't you mean Saudi Arabia?Turquoise wrote:
We really just need to get the fuck out of Afghanistan. McChrystal's remarks might have gotten him fired, but I don't doubt that his own feelings on the occupation are accurate.
If they cause us any further problems, just nuke the fuckers. The same goes for Pakistan.
It makes you wonder if they all get an email in the morning???FEOS wrote:
From "General Betrayus" to "Brilliant" in just a couple of years.
It's amazing how fickle Obama's supporter's are.
Last edited by ATG (2010-06-24 19:34:01)
I don't recall many people saying that. I find Petraeus neither traitorous nor brilliant -- he simply gets the job done, which is more than I can say for most elected officials.FEOS wrote:
From "General Betrayus" to "Brilliant" in just a couple of years.
It's amazing how fickle Obama's supporter's are.
Nor do I...Turquoise wrote:
I don't recall many people saying that. I find Petraeus neither traitorous nor brilliant -- he simply gets the job done, which is more than I can say for most elected officials.FEOS wrote:
From "General Betrayus" to "Brilliant" in just a couple of years.
It's amazing how fickle Obama's supporter's are.
Yep. Grab-and-hold I believe is what he created or something to that affect.Poseidon wrote:
Engineered the surge. Pretty much the father of modern counter-insurgency tactics.
Guy's awesome and a decorated war hero.
That doesn't make sense.Reciprocity wrote:
Once again, conservatives confuse dislike for a pointless war with dislike for the warriors.
One would hope... although I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.Harmor wrote:
Perhaps all these stupid rules of engagement will be turned on their head and we'll actually start fighting a real war.
The fired guy had a good point;Turquoise wrote:
One would hope... although I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.Harmor wrote:
Perhaps all these stupid rules of engagement will be turned on their head and we'll actually start fighting a real war.
The problem is that we're in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" position. Our current PC rules of engagement handicap our ability to stabilize Afghanistan and Iraq, but if we revised them to be more practical, then we'd have the locals and much of the rest of the world throwing a bitchfit over "civilian casualties."
Maybe these occupations will finally drive home the point that you don't enter a war unless you're willing to kill anything that gets in your way. Anything short of that spells either defeat or a completely unnecessarily extended occupation period.
We certainly weren't as PC when we took over Japan and Germany. We also were much more controlling over what was reported.
I'm not talking about McChrystal, I'm talking about this mythical dislike for General BetrayusPetraeus.ATG wrote:
That doesn't make sense.Reciprocity wrote:
Once again, conservatives confuse dislike for a pointless war with dislike for the warriors.
If you read the RS article you would see that the fired guy was following the ROE to the letter and because of that was unpopular with the troops.
He seemed to understand the hearts and mind aspect.
Last edited by Reciprocity (2010-06-24 21:46:28)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoveOn.org_ad_controversyReciprocity wrote:
I'm not talking about McChrystal, I'm talking about this mythical dislike for General BetrayusPetraeus.ATG wrote:
That doesn't make sense.Reciprocity wrote:
Once again, conservatives confuse dislike for a pointless war with dislike for the warriors.
If you read the RS article you would see that the fired guy was following the ROE to the letter and because of that was unpopular with the troops.
He seemed to understand the hearts and mind aspect.
You mean the dislike by the radical left?Reciprocity wrote:
I'm not talking about McChrystal, I'm talking about this mythical dislike for General BetrayusPetraeus.ATG wrote:
That doesn't make sense.Reciprocity wrote:
Once again, conservatives confuse dislike for a pointless war with dislike for the warriors.
If you read the RS article you would see that the fired guy was following the ROE to the letter and because of that was unpopular with the troops.
He seemed to understand the hearts and mind aspect.
