Just as empty as your little sentence i am afraid old bean.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
Did you guys hear something? Oh, I guess it was nothing.Bubbalo wrote:
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
QFE. But that only happens to me and a few others.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
If I was a mod, I would've given you a 3 day vacation for constantly derailing threads created by ATG.Bubbalo wrote:
In the traditional sense, you are an empire, because you took control of the Indian nations.
Practically no-one realises this, and instead claims the US is an empire on other grounds.
Having said that: I wasn't commenting on whether the US is or isn't an empire, rather I was pointing out that ATG clearly misunderstood what an empire is. Personally, I think calling the US an empire is something of a stretch.
Piss off dude. We know you think American troops are stupid, you have said it. So don't come in here just to derail.Bubbalo wrote:
You can search, if you want, but there'll be no pasting, because I have never called America imperialistic. Do they have some traits that an imperial nation might have? Sure. By the same token, a runner might have some traits that a high jumper might have. But I don't runner around calling runners high jumpers.
I think he's referring to vocal opinions in the past, not the past 15 days. The Dem party has been breeding opposition to the war from the beginning - having a vocal part of your own government against an active war is not helpful.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. What a shining example of misinformity and partisan bullshit.beerface702 wrote:
brilliantATG wrote:
Three entities are behind the continued unrest in Iraq.
1) the Sunni/Shia militias and the outside meddlers.
2) The Press
3) the democratic party in America.
you hit the nail on the head with 3 simple phrases
i agree
its unfornate people cant see past their daily drudge and misinformation
"The Democrat party are behind the continued unrest in Iraq"
Listen to yourself for fuck sake. That's patently ridiculous. Not to mention the fact they've only been in power for 15 days. Very sad.
Please state now in clear and quantifiable measures the actions taken by the Democrat party throughout the current conflict in Iraq that have led to/caused continuation of the civil unrest in Iraq.
There appears to be a shockingly large logic deficit on this forum of late.
Everytime contemptable blowhards like Ted Kennedy get in front of a mic and go on about how are are fighting a war based on liesCameronPoe wrote:
LOL. What a shining example of misinformity and partisan bullshit.beerface702 wrote:
brilliantATG wrote:
Three entities are behind the continued unrest in Iraq.
1) the Sunni/Shia militias and the outside meddlers.
2) The Press
3) the democratic party in America.
you hit the nail on the head with 3 simple phrases
i agree
its unfornate people cant see past their daily drudge and misinformation
"The Democrat party are behind the continued unrest in Iraq"
Listen to yourself for fuck sake. That's patently ridiculous. Not to mention the fact they've only been in power for 15 days. Very sad.
Please state now in clear and quantifiable measures the actions taken by the Democrat party throughout the current conflict in Iraq that have led to/caused continuation of the civil unrest in Iraq.
There appears to be a shockingly large logic deficit on this forum of late.
the insurgents see hope and continue fighting.
By suggesting there is internal conflict at home the democrats suggest to the jihadist that if they just keep fighting and hanging in there then eventually we will lose.
Politicians? How dare they express their own opinions about how their country should be run and the policies that are made. If they disagree with the President they should be forced to keep quiet as that's `best for the country`.Pug wrote:
I think he's referring to vocal opinions in the past, not the past 15 days. The Dem party has been breeding opposition to the war from the beginning - having a vocal part of your own government against an active war is not helpful.CameronPoe wrote:
LOL. What a shining example of misinformity and partisan bullshit.beerface702 wrote:
brilliant
you hit the nail on the head with 3 simple phrases
i agree
its unfornate people cant see past their daily drudge and misinformation
"The Democrat party are behind the continued unrest in Iraq"
Listen to yourself for fuck sake. That's patently ridiculous. Not to mention the fact they've only been in power for 15 days. Very sad.
Please state now in clear and quantifiable measures the actions taken by the Democrat party throughout the current conflict in Iraq that have led to/caused continuation of the civil unrest in Iraq.
There appears to be a shockingly large logic deficit on this forum of late.
Oh wait a sec, that's the type of government your trying to get rid of in Iraq, sorry, I forget these things.
Micromanaging a war = lost war.
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
Is it because we are American?usmarine2007 wrote:
QFE. But that only happens to me and a few others.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
If I was a mod, I would've given you a 3 day vacation for constantly derailing threads created by ATG.Bubbalo wrote:
In the traditional sense, you are an empire, because you took control of the Indian nations.
Practically no-one realises this, and instead claims the US is an empire on other grounds.
Having said that: I wasn't commenting on whether the US is or isn't an empire, rather I was pointing out that ATG clearly misunderstood what an empire is. Personally, I think calling the US an empire is something of a stretch.
No. Because I have been around this forum since Oct. 05, enough time to piss off enough people with no sense of humor.pRiNcEkAhUnA1 wrote:
Is it because we are American?usmarine2007 wrote:
QFE. But that only happens to me and a few others.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
If I was a mod, I would've given you a 3 day vacation for constantly derailing threads created by ATG.
Same here.usmarine2007 wrote:
No. Because I have been around this forum since Oct. 05, enough time to piss off enough people with no sense of humor.pRiNcEkAhUnA1 wrote:
Is it because we are American?usmarine2007 wrote:
QFE. But that only happens to me and a few others.
Kind of weird huh? Doesn't even seem that long.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Same here.usmarine2007 wrote:
No. Because I have been around this forum since Oct. 05, enough time to piss off enough people with no sense of humor.pRiNcEkAhUnA1 wrote:
Is it because we are American?
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in, and rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
Last edited by m3thod (2007-01-15 08:15:27)
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
That is just plain ignorant, ok we can play by the insurgents game! Lets firebomb every city in Iraq to make sure there are no insurgents!m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
That is not what I am saying smart ass. I am saying you cannot defeat any enemy who is not held accountable for their actions.m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
Last edited by usmarine2007 (2007-01-15 08:16:09)
QFT.usmarine2007 wrote:
That is not what I am saying smart ass. I am saying you cannot defeat any enemy who is not held accountable for their actions.m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
It would have been prudent to have planned carefully for eventualities no? This is WAR, all sort of nasty shit will happen, people lives will be lost, people will suffer, trillions of dollar down the khazi, its imperative to plan for everything! Especially those as glaring as the insurgent falls in the west and meddling fanatics in the east. The decision to got war was rash, incomplete and the occupation has been executed with text book incompetence.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
That is just plain ignorant, ok we can play by the insurgents game! Lets firebomb every city in Iraq to make sure there are no insurgents!m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
You cannot expect to invade a country slap bang in the middle of we hate the American Infidels central where you are systematically despised and expect to fight these fanatics toe to toe. This it what i am referring to, to use the excuse "Damn we don't have their advantage of being able to melt into the background" is laughable. So guess what? Tough shit, should have thought of this. I'm no strategic military adviser but an infant could have told you this.
Get it? Now back to Junk CN, you don't have the intellectual capacity to post here.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Who is using that excuse?m3thod wrote:
This it what i am referring to, to use the excuse "Damn we don't have their advantage of being able to melt into the background" is laughable. So guess what? Tough shit, should have thought of this. I'm no strategic military adviser but an infant could have told you this.
usmarine2007 wrote:
That is not what I am saying smart ass. I am saying you cannot defeat any enemy who is not held accountable for their actions.m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!usmarine2007 wrote:
Something a lot of you fail to realize is the insurgents have a huge advantage that cannot be defeated by countries who follow the basic "rules" of war.
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
Tough shit.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
The europeans wake up and suddenly the thread gains an extra 15 posts lol
we always knew insurgents would pour in, but i don't think anyone was expecting it to happen in the volume it did
the best thing we could do ATM is close the Iraqi boarders, but we haven't done so. IMO thats the real failure, everything else is just a result of that. Now the question is, how come no one has brought failure to close boarders in the list of mistakes they have in the war?
we always knew insurgents would pour in, but i don't think anyone was expecting it to happen in the volume it did
the best thing we could do ATM is close the Iraqi boarders, but we haven't done so. IMO thats the real failure, everything else is just a result of that. Now the question is, how come no one has brought failure to close boarders in the list of mistakes they have in the war?
WTF are you talking about?m3thod wrote:
usmarine2007 wrote:
That is not what I am saying smart ass. I am saying you cannot defeat any enemy who is not held accountable for their actions.m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
Tough shit.
Well this really isn't a war anymore, the Iraqi Army is defeated, now the troops stationed in Iraq are fighting an enemy that dresses as a civilian, hell you don't know if that guy who sells cigarettes down the street may your killer tomorrow. This type of battle has not been dealt with before, it is hard to adapt to this kind of situation, makes it even harder when the media is like blah blah blah dead in Iraq, war escalates. Not fucking helping at all. What happened to haji waving American flag and thanking American soldiers?m3thod wrote:
It would have been prudent to have planned carefully for eventualities no? This is WAR, all sort of nasty shit will happen, people lives will be lost, people will suffer, trillions of dollar down the khazi, its imperative to plan for everything! Especially those as glaring as the insurgent falls in the west and meddling fanatics in the east. The decision to got war was rash, incomplete and the occupation has been executed with text book incompetence.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
That is just plain ignorant, ok we can play by the insurgents game! Lets firebomb every city in Iraq to make sure there are no insurgents!m3thod wrote:
Don't you just love the blame game?!
My turn! My turn!
I blame the muppets in your government who failed to realise insurgents would pour in and would rather ungentlemanly fail to follow the rules of war. Bad insurgent! Bad! Bad!
You cannot expect to invade a country slap bang in the middle of we hate the American Infidels central where you are systematically despised and expect to fight these fanatics toe to toe. This it what i am referring to, to use the excuse "Damn we don't have their advantage of being able to melt into the background" is laughable. So guess what? Tough shit, should have thought of this. I'm no strategic military adviser but an infant could have told you this.
Get it? Now back to Junk CN, you don't have the intellectual capacity to post here.
Btw, I find it kind of Ironic that people from the UK says well tough shit US, whilst their own country is in the same situation...
France experienced much the same thing last year actually, not quite as many people were being killed but massive uprising by the muslim youth
The average run-of-the-mill insurgent probably cares little for the internal machinations of US politics. They see an occupation, they will continue to fight it until that occupation ends. The foreign elements may be interested somewhat in what goes on in the US but the average Iraqi probably doesn't give a shit. I personally don't think the USSR would EVER have defeated the Afghans, save perhaps if they nuked the entire length and breadth of the country. The same rules apply today in Afghanistan and probably in Iraq also.ATG wrote:
Everytime contemptable blowhards like Ted Kennedy get in front of a mic and go on about how are are fighting a war based on lies
the insurgents see hope and continue fighting.
By suggesting there is internal conflict at home the democrats suggest to the jihadist that if they just keep fighting and hanging in there then eventually we will lose.
The Democrats did harness the questionability of the Iraq war, there is no question about that. But to imagine that has had any effect on a miserably poorly run failure of a military campaign over which they had no control is just plain wrong. Let's face it: Bush is doing his own thing here with the 20,500 troops. If he fails, which he will, then there won't be anyone to blame but himself.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-15 09:04:16)
I don't recall the Ruskies building schools and hospitals Cam. Sewage treat facilities, etc.CameronPoe wrote:
The average run-of-the-mill insurgent probably cares little for the internal machinations of US politics. They see an occupation, they will continue to fight it until that occupation ends. The foreign elements may be interested somewhat in what goes on in the US but the average Iraqi probably doesn't give a shit. I personally don't think the USSR would EVER have defeated the Afghans, save perhaps if they nuked the entire length and breadth of the country. The same rules apply today in Afghanistan and sadly in Iraq also.ATG wrote:
Everytime contemptable blowhards like Ted Kennedy get in front of a mic and go on about how are are fighting a war based on lies
the insurgents see hope and continue fighting.
By suggesting there is internal conflict at home the democrats suggest to the jihadist that if they just keep fighting and hanging in there then eventually we will lose.