Obama in Afghanistan, same mistake as Johnson in Vietnam
Realist
Obama, don't be a half pussy, be a full pussy and pull out of there, you'll
only LOSE with your current strategy anyway. Pity you know S--- about
history.
Manager
"Too few troops committed until it was too late to fix the situation.
Obama, don't be a half pussy, be a full pussy and pull out of there,
you'll only LOSE with your current strategy anyway."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barack Obama is ego driven, not logic or honesty driven. He does not
want to admit that he has been wrong about Afghanistan all along.
Barack Obama is a habitual liar, and he is now claiming that he is not
"nation building." Of course he is trying to nation build Afghanistan
and he will fail. Afghanistan is 100 years away from having a stable,
civilized government. Obama thinks because he is God Obama he can walk
on water and can somehow magically get the job done. This naive
narcissist will drain all our wallets of billions of dollars and get
lots of people killed for nothing. In the end, the USA will leave
Afghanistan and Afghanistan will revert to being a primitive culture
with values far different than our own.
We cannot control the activities of El-Qaeda in the USA, Canada, and
the UK. The 911 attack was planned and trained for right here in the
USA. How are we ever going to make Afghanistan so tight and shinny
that no terrorist can ever live there? We cannot even do that here!
Is it safe to walk the streets at night of our own capitol city,
Washington DC? How are we ever going to make Afghanistan safe?
Barack Obama is a fool and his advisors like Richard Gates are
warmongers who can only think in the tiny little terms of bombs and
guns to solve our problems. Our real problem is our horrible,
hypocritical foreign policy controlled by the Israeli lobby. If the
USA could regain its sovereignty from the Israeli cult, then terrorism
will end on its own. Even we do not have a real democracy here at
home. How are we ever going to bring real democracy to Afghanistan?
Are we going to train pigs to sing and fly when we cannot sing and fly
ourselves?
Butteye_Jest
Realist <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Absolutely. The US could still be losing in Vietnam, instead of
Afghanistan.
--
Ole Butteye
Ramon F Herrera
A critical aspect of using history as a guideline is know when to
apply it and when NOT to.
In short, your comparison is rather crappy.
How can you even begin to compare Vietnam, with its bombing of
civilian sites (forced by the limitation of technology at the time),
with its 60,000 American lives lost, not to mention forced draft with
Afghanistan?
The Afghan and Iraqi wars are sufficiently popular (or more correctly:
they are not very unpopular).
Just consider this figure. In the last year (or semester? quarter?)
more military died of motorcycle accidents than in the war.
-Ramon
Straightarrow
I find it peculiar how your attitude about the Afghan war has changed
since your guy is now CIC.
Ramon F Herrera
War is a particularly nasty business, and you know what they say:
"In any war, the first casualty is the truth".
Speaking of truth -or lack thereof- I am afraid you have confused me
with somebody else. My attitude towards the two wars has not change
since 9/11 until today.
You righties are too simplistic. You just placed me in a big box with
the "Assorted Liberals" name on it. I am sorry, but I refuse to be
labeled, much less by the likes of you.
In essence, I support the government of the USA. I supported the Bush
and Obama policies in war and immigration, among others.
I denounced that opportunistic bitch Cindy Sheehan (sorry for your
loss, and thank you for your sacrifice Ms. Sheehan) because she went
to Venezuela (I was there at the time) to ask Chavez for money, just
like Sean Penn, Danny Glover and other movie stars. It turns out
bastard Chavez is giving out MY money to make movies, even one in
which he is the hero.
-Ramon
"In May 2007, President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez contributed $18
million to fund the production of Toussaint for Glover, who is a
prominent U.S. supporter of Chávez."
Liberals are vermin
Well all know the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bosnia, etc., aren't
real wars on any kind of true war scale, but America should avoid the
discredited Vietnam-originated strategy of "gradualism." To win a
war, you either commit fully, or not at all.
Sid9
"Liberals are vermin" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b1214714-b982-4ae7...@p35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
.
bush,jr never committed fully.
We needed a draft.
We needed war taxes to pay for his wars.
We needed national mobilization.
bush,jr could not have gotten any of that...he knew it....if he tried there
would have been NO wars.
Reg
Realist (aka the racist Rastus, aka Rich, aka...) is living in his own
tiny right wing reality, which is no reality at all unless you're a
delusional ditto head or one of the 1% of Americans who watch Fox News
because they prefer propaganda over facts. Realist isn't even
allowed to cross the border from Canada into the USA, so why would
anyone listen to a criminal? The gibberish he posts prove that he's
the antithesis of a "realist" and in fact he's another uneducated,
ignorant right wing pinhead who knows fuck all and whose opinions are
of no consequence because they don't stand up to scrutiny and are
loaded with radical right wing partisan bias.
Reg
Why are you replying to your own posts under a different name? You
ignorant Canadian faggot.
Fact Attack
> war, you either commit fully, or not at all.- Hide quoted text -
get over there and die to protect us from Saddam's biological
weapons laborotories you fucking retard war bitch.
SaPeIsMa
"Butteye_Jest" <benda...@gotdaTshirt.com> wrote in message
news:bendardund-0ACF6...@news.islandnet.com...
Until moment the Democrats pulled their pants down, bent over and grabbed
their ankles for the North Vietnamese, the US military had already beaten
the North Vietnames and the VietCong.
The ONLY reason for South Vietnam losing was because
1) The Democrats pulled US troops
2) The Democrats stopped aid to South Vietnam
Then as now, the Democrats were so busy looking for an "exit strategy", they
forgot that winning is the BEST "exit strategy".
SaPeIsMa
"Ramon F Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote in message
news:2e2dd431-f85c-42a2...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 25, 7:17 am, Straightarrow <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 11:58 pm, Ramon F Herrera <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 25, 12:24 am, Realist <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > > Too few troops committed until it was too late to fix the situation.
> > > Obama, don't be a half pussy, be a full pussy and pull out of there,
> > > you'll
> > > only LOSE with your current strategy anyway. Pity you know S--- about
> > > history.
>
> > A critical aspect of using history as a guideline is know when to
> > apply it and when NOT to.
>
> > In short, your comparison is rather crappy.
>
> > How can you even begin to compare Vietnam, with its bombing of
> > civilian sites (forced by the limitation of technology at the time),
> > with its 60,000 American lives lost, not to mention forced draft with
> > Afghanistan?
>
> > The Afghan and Iraqi wars are sufficiently popular (or more correctly:
> > they are not very unpopular).
>
> > Just consider this figure. In the last year (or semester? quarter?)
> > more military died of motorcycle accidents than in the war.
>
> > -Ramon
>
> I find it peculiar how your attitude about the Afghan war has changed
> since your guy is now CIC.
# War is a particularly nasty business, and you know what they say:
# "In any war, the first casualty is the truth".
Indeed
Sad that you and your ilk are CLEAR proof of that..
#
# Speaking of truth -or lack thereof- I am afraid you have confused me
# with somebody else. My attitude towards the two wars has not change
# since 9/11 until today.
But your attitude to the truth, has sadly been consistently deficient
#
# You righties are too simplistic. You just placed me in a big box with
# the "Assorted Liberals" name on it. I am sorry, but I refuse to be
# labeled, much less by the likes of you.
LOL
Just the same way, that idiots like you lmp all alleged "righties" into
one group ?
It's funny to watch idiots like you live up to the very accusation you make
about others in the VERY ACCUSATION...
Bert Byfield
>> Afghanistan.
> Until moment the Democrats pulled their pants down, bent over and
> grabbed their ankles for the North Vietnamese,
You nazi types love your fag images.
> the US military had
> already beaten the North Vietnames and the VietCong.
In your nazi dreams. Nowhere else.
> The ONLY reason for South Vietnam losing was because
There never was such a thing as "South Vietnam" -- this was a
creation of American propaganda. The Vietnamese fought for their
freedom from foreign domination as they have done for a thousand
years, and won it, again.
> 1) The Democrats pulled US troops
They should have. They did no such thing.
> 2) The Democrats stopped aid to South Vietnam
See above about "South Vietnam."
> Then as now, the Democrats were so busy looking for an "exit
> strategy", they forgot that winning is the BEST "exit strategy".
Then as now, the Democrats talked about peace, but DID NOTHING. There
was no way to "win" in Vietnam. What would we have won? We were
behaving like Nazis then, as we are now in the Middle East. If we
"win" in Afghanistan, what do we win? Free rocks? Horse-riding
lessons? What?