Head Sissy-Boy In Charge vs. McChrystal
Way Back Jack
opposed to a corporate soldier looking for that 4th star -- committed
to keeping his men alive and doing his best to defeat the Jihad. He is
hampered at every turn by the utterly loony prescriptions imposed on
him by a Commander-in-Training-Pants who doesn't possess a newborn
puppy's expertise in Military Operations, nor the modesty to defer to
those who do.
It is nearly impossible for a military man to work for an
America-hater like Obama. I'm surprised a lot more officers don't quit
in disgust. I suppose its devotion to duty and to their men, but at a
certain point you have to consider that you're only propping up an
imbecile.
Lubow
> General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier -- as
> opposed to a corporate soldier looking for that 4th star -- committed
> to keeping his men alive and doing his best to defeat the Jihad. He is
> hampered at every turn by the utterly loony prescriptions imposed on
> him by a Commander-in-Training-Pants who doesn't possess a newborn
> puppy's expertise in Military Operations, nor the modesty to defer to
> those who do.
I respect Gen McChrystal. He is a real American hero. He holds the
Combat Infantryman's Badge just like my dad. That means he earned his
combat pay. That means he risked his life for our freedom. However,
being an unselfish hero does not mean the man is four star general
material.
It was a mistake to promote McChrystal to GEN from LTG. He is a
covert ops guy. He is a commander of ranger units, special forces
units and airborne. That's what he does. He is years away from
being the politician/PR/big picture guy a four star general needs to
be. Gates and Obama made the same mistake that Lincoln and Truman
made.
The difference is that Lincoln made that mistake -- appointing the
wrong general -- eight times before he selected U.S. Grant.
And like Lincoln, and Truman, Obama will admit the mistake, make the
correction and move on.
ObamaNation=Abomination
>On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>
>>General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>
>
>BWHAHAHAHAHA
>
>Not for long, stupid
>
Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
Wayne
"Lubow" <dynami...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e46c3225-a9fa-46de...@w12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
********************
Most likely, the mistake was Obama, not McChrystal.
Looks like the general decided that he didn't want the job, if Obama wasn't
on board.
Lubow
> Most likely, the mistake was Obama, not McChrystal.
> Looks like the general decided that he didn't want the job, if Obama wasn't
> on board.
McClellan said the same about Lincoln and even ran against him in
1864.
MacArthur said the same about Truman. Truman is now regarded as one
of our greatest presidents while MacArthur is known as the out of
control general that stole gold out of the Philippine treasury, took
protection money from Philippine President Quezon and wanted to nuke
China.
Lubow
(ObamaNation=Abomination) wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nort...@tweet.net wrote:
> >On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>
> >>General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>
> >BWHAHAHAHAHA
>
> >Not for long, stupid
>
> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
The mission required a general with brains, not balls.
W Spilman
"ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
message news:4c221706....@news.eternal-september.org...
No, he put his own balls in a vice.
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
He also forgot that when it is twenty below, soldiers can walk across
the Yalu River.
Phlip
The mission - Bush's mission of "nation building" in Afghanistan - is
impossible. You cannot kill them until the survivors love you. That's
how any land-war in Asia goes. They have no resources for us to grab,
no infrastructure for us to control, and no central gov't for us to
rule through. They only have peasant soldiers quite prepared to force
us to continue killing them until every last one is dead.
You cannot fight a land war in Asia. You cannot fight a war to change
a regime, or "introduce democracy". And you certainly cannot fight a
war to turn a populace away from vicious thugs like the Taliban. If
that's the kind of leaders those people would pick over us, then no
amount of liberal "change", or homilies about equal rights or justice
will appeal to them.
Daniel
Says the armchair general.
Daniel
> > The mission required a general with brains, not balls.
>
> The mission - Bush's mission of "nation building" in Afghanistan - is
> impossible.
Then why is nobama doing the same thing?
Phlip
To get elected.
He can't run against 40 years of fear mongering and say, "oh, let's
just make peace with all our Official Enemies", after idiots like you
believed every dumb news story about them. Our TV news tends to under
report our terror attacks against them - including bullshit like
giving all their dictators free guns.
sillapond
>> The mission required a general with brains, not balls.
>
> The mission - Bush's mission of "nation building" in Afghanistan - is
> impossible. You cannot kill them until the survivors love you.
He liberated 25 million and set in motion events where women finally
could vote.
If they're ungrateful, so be it.
> That's
> how any land-war in Asia goes. They have no resources for us to grab,
Did you miss the report on the vast mineral resources discovered there?
sillapond
So you make Karzai out to be a dictator?
Wasn;t he ELECTED?
ObamaNation=Abomination
We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
Heh.
W Spilman
"ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
message news:4c227878...@news.eternal-september.org...
No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
the enemy.
ObamaNation=Abomination
>
>"ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
>message news:4c227878...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:54:26 -0400, "W Spilman" <w...@knows.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
>>>message news:4c221706....@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nor...@tweet.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>BWHAHAHAHAHA
>>>>>
>>>>>Not for long, stupid
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
>>>
>>>No, he put his own balls in a vice.
>>>
>>
>> We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
>> enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
>>
>> Heh.
>
>No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
>of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
>the enemy.
>
>
But Obama wants them to fight under his pro-enemy rules of engagement
...
johnny@.
> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
> message news:4c227878...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:54:26 -0400, "W Spilman"<w...@knows.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
>>> message news:4c221706....@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nor...@tweet.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BWHAHAHAHAHA
>>>>>
>>>>> Not for long, stupid
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
>>>
>>> No, he put his own balls in a vice.
>>>
>>
>> We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
>> enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
>>
>> Heh.
>
> No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
> of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
> the enemy.
>
>
Speaking of the chain of command. Why didn't Obama use it. Why did he
bring the general to the white house and publicly humiliate him?
Phlip
> bring the general to the white house and publicly humiliate him?
Because he's the Commander in Chief.
W Spilman
" johnny@." <joh...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:hvu1fb$pgq$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Maybe the rabble of right-wing attack dogs waiting to shreik
and wail that he had "passed the buck" if he did? McChrystal
humiliated himself well enough when got drunk at an interview
with a hippie assrag.
sillapond
> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
> message news:4c227878...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:54:26 -0400, "W Spilman"<w...@knows.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
>>> message news:4c221706....@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nor...@tweet.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BWHAHAHAHAHA
>>>>>
>>>>> Not for long, stupid
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
>>>
>>> No, he put his own balls in a vice.
>>>
>>
>> We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
>> enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
>>
>> Heh.
>
> No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
> of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
> the enemy.
>
>
sillapond
Daniel
> "ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:54:26 -0400, "W Spilman" <w...@knows.com> wrote:
>
> >>"ObamaNation=Abomination" <DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
> >>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nort...@tweet.net wrote:
>
> >>>>On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>
> >>>>>General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>
> >>>>BWHAHAHAHAHA
>
> >>>>Not for long, stupid
>
> >>> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
>
> >>No, he put his own balls in a vice.
>
> > We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
> > enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
>
> > Heh.
>
> No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
> of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
> the enemy.
Too bad for nobama a majority of them agree with McChrystal
Daniel
DIdn't answer the question. Thanks for trying.
Daniel
> " johnny@." <joh...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:hvu1fb$pgq$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 6/23/2010 5:16 PM, W Spilman wrote:
> >> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
> >>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:54:26 -0400, "W Spilman"<w...@knows.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> "ObamaNation=Abomination"<DumpObama@ImmediatelyIfNotSooner.> wrote in
> >>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 07:46:37 -0600, Nort...@tweet.net wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 12:10:14 GMT, home@home. (Way Back Jack) wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> General Stanley McChrystal is a professional WARRIOR soldier
>
> >>>>>> BWHAHAHAHAHA
>
> >>>>>> Not for long, stupid
>
> >>>>> Yeah, you faggots bit off his balls.
>
> >>>> No, he put his own balls in a vice.
>
> >>> We gotta get rid of these warrior generals who are trying to kill the
> >>> enemy, otherwise Hamas, Hezbollah, and Cair won't like Obama anymore.
>
> >>> Heh.
>
> >> No, insubordination has no place in a military chain
> >> of command. We have plenty of people who can kill
> >> the enemy.
>
> > Speaking of the chain of command. Why didn't Obama use it. Why did he
> > bring the general to the white house and publicly humiliate him?
>
> Maybe the rabble of right-wing attack dogs waiting to shreik
> and wail that he had "passed the buck" if he did? McChrystal
> humiliated himself well enough when got drunk at an interview
> with a hippie assrag.
McChrystal only vocalized what the vast majority of American Soldiers
are thinking.
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
Not planning on winning any wars with a military like that, I take it?
Phlip
That the war is unwinnable? Fuck yeah! McC is more librul than Obama
on THAT one!!!
Daniel
<dea...@deadduz.com> wrote:
> > Too bad for nobama a majority of them agree with McChrystal
>
> Not planning on winning any wars with a military like that, I take it?
We won in Iraq, and are winning in Afghanistan, in spite of the
"leadership" nobama has shown.
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
What exactly did America win in Iraq?
And who on earth thinks the US is winning in Afghanistan?
Daniel
> >On Jun 24, 11:43 am, "5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09"
> ><dea...@deadduz.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Too bad for nobama a majority of them agree with McChrystal
>
> >> Not planning on winning any wars with a military like that, I take it?
>
> >We won in Iraq, and are winning in Afghanistan, in spite of the
> >"leadership" nobama has shown.
>
> What exactly did America win in Iraq?
Liberated millions of Iraqis, and gained a potential ally in the
Middle East. You really should learn something about world affairs
before you post.
>
> And who on earth thinks the US is winning in Afghanistan?
Anyone with a brain, which clearly leaves you out.
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
<sabot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 24, 12:01 pm, "5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09"
><ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:46:02 -0700 (PDT), Daniel
>>
>> <sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jun 24, 11:43 am, "5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09"
>> ><dea...@deadduz.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Too bad for nobama a majority of them agree with McChrystal
>>
>> >> Not planning on winning any wars with a military like that, I take it?
>>
>> >We won in Iraq, and are winning in Afghanistan, in spite of the
>> >"leadership" nobama has shown.
>>
>> What exactly did America win in Iraq?
>
>Liberated millions of Iraqis, and gained a potential ally in the
>Middle East. You really should learn something about world affairs
>before you post.
Liberated them from what, exactly? Yes, Saddam was a thug and his
sons were pigs, but the typical Iraqi enjoyed considerably more
personal freedom than he does today, and not only that, but had first
world electric, sewage, and infrastructure in the major cities.
>
>>
>> And who on earth thinks the US is winning in Afghanistan?
>
>Anyone with a brain, which clearly leaves you out.
In other words, all you have is empty bluster.
sillapond
Wow, that relieves him of any need to be humane.
Phlip
> > What exactly did America win in Iraq?
>
> Liberated millions of Iraqis
Oh yeah, there's about 7 million of them "liberated" to Syria.
Luv that "fire the army, but let them keep their weapons" system to
win the peace, huh?
Gee, it's almost like Cheney WANTED a civil war!
sillapond
> On Jun 24, 9:06 am, Daniel<sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> What exactly did America win in Iraq?
>>
>> Liberated millions of Iraqis
>
> Oh yeah, there's about 7 million of them "liberated" to Syria.
Why is it you overstate every numeric claim you make here, liar?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8551723.stm
The United Nations refugee agency estimates around 2 million Iraqis live
abroad, the bulk leaving after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
The largest number of Iraqi expats live in neighbouring Jordan and Syria.
Friday is also the last day of campaigning in Iraq, amid pre-election
violence and heavy security.
The Iraqi election commission says there are polling stations in nearly
60 cities worldwide and voting is staggered over three days.
Expat votes cast in Jordan and Syria could play a deciding role in a
tight election race, counting for around 10 seats in the 325-member
parliament, which will form the next government.
Estimates on how many Iraqis live in Syria vary - figures range from
300,000 to 1.2 million.
> Luv that "fire the army, but let them keep their weapons" system to
> win the peace, huh?
>
> Gee, it's almost like Cheney WANTED a civil war!
Straw man.
Cheney isn't here now.
But your repeated LIES are.
Daniel
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>before you post.
>
> Liberated them from what, exactly? Yes, Saddam was a thug and his
> sons were pigs, but the typical Iraqi enjoyed considerably more
> personal freedom than he does today, and not only that, but had first
> world electric, sewage, and infrastructure in the major cities.
The ONLY people that had any of the things you claim were Saddams
supporters. Perhaps you should get a fucking clue.
>
>
>
> >> And who on earth thinks the US is winning in Afghanistan?
>
> >Anyone with a brain, which clearly leaves you out.
>
> In other words, all you have is empty bluster.
You misspelled reality.
Daniel
> On Jun 24, 9:06 am, Daniel <sabot12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > What exactly did America win in Iraq?
>
> > Liberated millions of Iraqis
>
> Oh yeah, there's about 7 million of them "liberated" to Syria.
Cite?
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
<sabot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 24, 12:10 pm, "5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09"
><ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> >before you post.
>>
>> Liberated them from what, exactly? Yes, Saddam was a thug and his
>> sons were pigs, but the typical Iraqi enjoyed considerably more
>> personal freedom than he does today, and not only that, but had first
>> world electric, sewage, and infrastructure in the major cities.
>
>
>The ONLY people that had any of the things you claim were Saddams
>supporters. Perhaps you should get a fucking clue.
That was about 75% of the country, which compares well with America.
Did you know Iraq had sizeable Jewish and Christian populations prior
to the American invasion?
Phlip
You actually have not heard that yet? That we handed Syria a refugee
crisis, to "save" 7 million survivors from a dictator only
approximately as bad as, say, the Saudis?
sillapond
You are a LIAR!
You were already shown that the actual number of Iraqis in Syria does
NOT exceed 1.2 million, why do you persist in LYING????
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6766067.stm
Some 1.5m Iraqis are now estimated to be living as refugees in other
countries, mostly neighbouring Syria and Jordan.
Understand, every time you do this you will be exposed as a liar.
ltlee1
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 09:42:42 -0700 (PDT), Lubow
>
> <dynamitem...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jun 23, 11:21 am, "Wayne" <mygarbage...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >> Most likely, the mistake was Obama, not McChrystal.
> >> Looks like the general decided that he didn't want the job, if Obama wasn't
> >> on board.
>
> >McClellan said the same about Lincoln and even ran against him in
> >1864.
>
> >MacArthur said the same about Truman. Truman is now regarded as one
> >of our greatest presidents while MacArthur is known as the out of
> >control general that stole gold out of the Philippine treasury, took
> >protection money from Philippine President Quezon and wanted to nuke
> >China.
>
> He also forgot that when it is twenty below, soldiers can walk across
> the Yalu River.
Minor correction.
The Chinese built an underwater pontoon bridge to avoid ariel
detection.
Soldiers walked across the Yalu River naked at freezing temperatue in
the
middle of the night.
Phlip
If you read closely, I avoided saying the 7m survivors were in Syria.
Duh.
5521 Dead, 654 since 1/20/09
Do you have a cite for that? It's an extraordinary version, and I'd like
to check it out.