3000-facts

[gardenweasel]

Regarding the reporting of death numbers, lets not ignore the obvious. A free press is part of a healthy democracy. That fact will not change.

In war gaming, when your side's government form is "democratic," you must always plan for the tendency of internal public opinion growing against your war campaign. Its sort of a fact of modern life after Vietnam. Numbers of war deaths will get reported home.

The Administration and Pentagon recognized this, and tried to manage the flow and type of information reaching the U.S. during the first months of the campaign by use of embedded media with field units. This effort proved unmanageable in the ensuing insurgency. The long term question is what will they try to do next time?

More importantly, some posters here seem to unintentionally suggest that our democracy is to blame. Should it be traded in for another form of governemnt or democracy? Something with a more closed society? What, and lose the economic benefits that an open democracy brings? Let's not go crazy.

For better or for worse, democracy is the best form of government to have, even in war gaming. The trick is to pick the "winnable" wars, and pass on the more risky military ventures.

freedom of the press,eh?....i am,as i see you are,very, very sensitive to this issue..every time I see or read something like your tripe,i get a tremendous pain in my ass.....


utter bullshit.....there`s a huge difference between freedom of the press and sedition.....any moron gets that...

as i said numerous times,publishing classified documents concerning the security of the u.s.homeland should be considered treason..and those that leaked that info should be prosecuted....

the press should be vilified....unfortunately,many in this country are so brainwashed,that they`d rather see bush vilified than see their own families protected....

that`s a mental illness....not freedom of the press...

.. and showing film of american g.i.`s being headshot by jihadi snipers is not only insane,but also treasonous,imo...not to mention enemy propaganda(which cnn admitted)........

i`m not even going mention the ridiculously excessive reporting of abu gharaib...and so many other anti-american issues broached i`ve mentioned in this forum time and again....

you,sir, couldn`t see an idiot if he looked into your bathroom mirror...

 

[gardenweasel]

why the f-ck would i want to discuss the afghan/russian conflict?.....cause smurph mentioned it?....

it`s not difficult juggling 15 moonbats at a time...but,it`s a drain on one`s stamina....

it`s a virtual troll-a-palooza at times....

you and smurph can discuss the russkies..... you have my blessing...

 

[kosar]

why the f-ck would i want to discuss the afghan/russian conflict?.....cause smurph mentioned it?....

it`s not difficult juggling 15 moonbats at a time...but,it`s a drain on one`s stamina....

it`s a virtual troll-a-palooza at times....

you and smurph can discuss the russkies..... you have my blessing...

I believe you fancy yourself as some sort of expert on the conflicts that have absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. You try to tie said conflicts to this one in Iraq.

Yet you will continue to ignore the only conflict that really is applicable. Again, I don't blame you.

As far as me wanting to talk about it because smurphy mentioned it?

Yeah-ok. I've 'mentioned it' a dozen times before and of course it was always ignored. It was brought up again by redsfann, and then again by me today. Then again by smurphy.

Once you get your head out of your ass, you'll finally realize that this sort of 'mission' can never be 'won' by us. And no, it has nothing to do with any 'media.'

We got Saddam, his sons, and set up this 'democracy.' So *something* got done, I guess.

However, i'm still waiting for an answer from you or anybody on what defines a 'win' that will satisfy the braindead among us(nothing against you personally).

 

[gardenweasel]

g`night fellers...as usual,it`s nothing personal...

jc....sorry for getting personal....the redundancy of the discussions tends to get old..i get cranky.....no harm intended....my bad...

i want to believe that you have good intentions...but,as we know,the road to hell is paved with good intentions......

if you're aiding evil(not you personally), and imo, it`s a detriment to your/my own country`s security and well being,i`m going to point that out.....

we know the nazis,as do the islamists, thought they were doing a good thing, purifying the arian race,or as with the islamists,smashing/killing/converting all non-believers...

unfortunately,good intentions don't count for squat....as you guys point out ad infinitum regarding the removal of saddam....

it`s been real...:sadwave: ,

 

[gardenweasel]

I believe you fancy yourself as some sort of expert on the conflicts that have absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. You try to tie said conflicts to this one in Iraq.

Yet you will continue to ignore the only conflict that really is applicable. Again, I don't blame you.

As far as me wanting to talk about it because smurphy mentioned it?

Yeah-ok. I've 'mentioned it' a dozen times before and of course it was always ignored. It was brought up again by redsfann, and then again by me today. Then again by smurphy.

Once you get your head out of your ass, you'll finally realize that this sort of 'mission' can never be 'won' by us. And no, it has nothing to do with any 'media.'

We got Saddam, his sons, and set up this 'democracy.' So *something* got done, I guess.

However, i'm still waiting for an answer from you or anybody on what defines a 'win' that will satisfy the braindead among us(nothing against you personally).

that`s ridiculous...i`ve never claimed to be "an expert" on anything....i`m fairly knowledgable regarding boxing analyses...and lord knows i`ve screwed that up more than i care to mention........

i`m just another swinging dick with an asshole and an opinion.....

o.k...for the last time....i`d like to see us leave iraq...under their own government`s control..not the jihadi`s.....and not as a puppet state of iran..i think it`s good that saddam`s gone....i`d like to see an iraq that doesn`t become another afghanistan...

yes..the media is harming our security and they undermine our military at every opportunity...

yes....saddam was dangerous...no,he wasn`t in any box,as we saw with the oil for food scandal and all the munitions and ied`s that have continued to pour in over the iraqi borders would indicate.......

and yes,to cut and run would be a disaster...as many democrats agree...it would encourage the jihad...and show us to again be weak...and a piss poor/undependable ally...

was the post-war occupation badly handled?...yes......was the insurgency underestimated?....iran`s involvement underestimated?...yes...

was dunkirk a disaster during ww2?...yes....that doesn`t mean we quit like we did in viet nam....

were wmd`s the only reason for removing saddam?...of course not...and you know i`ve done this one maybe 25 times before...i say do your own legwork...respectfully...

does that mean i hate bush and want us to be embarrassed and defeated ala viet nam?...no...

nor would that fact change under hillary,kerry or even distinguished democratic leader al sharpton(choke).....

i am an american first...and a conservative somewhere down the ladder...i don`t hate liberals,democrats,kerry,hillary or murtha more than i love the country....

forgive me if i`m physically unable to wax philosophical on every topic you guys deem worthy....

liberals outnumber the conservatives here,in case you haven`t noticed....

i give it my best shot...and try and keep everyone amused...sometimes unintentionally as you libs love to point out....

 

[djv]

It's just not us that has a problem winning. No one wins this type of conflict. Israel been stuck in one that is about the same for 56 years. Russia gave it a try in Afghanistan. And of course it did not work. These folks till Saddam showed up and started killing all his foes. Well they would have there civil war every other year. Saddam Had a tough under cover police force that kept folks in line. Killed them with out asking questions. Just a nice little secret police force. He had a Army but didn't use them for small details of killing. Except for Kurds. There he used his Air Force and Army to kill.
The big probem is they have to want peace. They think revenge. So there is no end. There is no
win. Well I guess there could be if we kill them all.
Chance of that 0. Chance of us coming home 100%

 

[JCDunkDogs]

jc....sorry for getting personal....the redundancy of the discussions tends to get old..i get cranky.....no harm intended....my bad...

i want to believe that you have good intentions...but,as we know,the road to hell is paved with good intentions......

if you're aiding evil(not you personally), and imo, it`s a detriment to your/my own country`s security and well being,i`m going to point that out.....

lol...no offense taken, gw. We just agree to disagree, and that's okay.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Why do you put the blame exclusively on media and liberals? Did the government deserve any blame?"

Yep I think they could have ended the war in short order by bombing North to smitherines--assume reason they didn't was threat of Chinese intervention--and that is where another fault would lie--Don't get in a war where your hands are tied--for less than all out assualt.

and on media issue which would you prefer Them feeding our media--eg Algazeera sending sniper tape to cnn to run or visa versa like terrorist websites running our news showing troops that have died and growing decent against war in U.S.
--or maybe a mixture of the 2 with Algazeera/NYT running front page news on prison for 40 + days simultaneously.

or if you prefer would you like the totally false info put out by media from their non-named sources that don't exist.
Take a look at this episode that msnmb/AP put up that never happened.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15873863/

Lets see who Algazeera is quoting today--Hmm appears they and ACLU want to rehash prison episode-wonder if NYT will chime in?
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F4B850EE-7F56-4C8A-8B68-E51C61863F0A.htm

The Bottom line-- Terrorist and their media and liberal and their media have one undisputed common goal--get our troops out of middle east.


P.S. fail to see where long hair has anything to do with persons view--had long hair myself when I got out of service--I'll hunt up college Id if you'd like.

 

[smurphy]

Don't get in a war where your hands are tied--for less than all out assualt.

I think we all agree with that. That might be the most important factor in all this. Our leaders should recognize this. It's why we strategically are in big trouble when we start a pre-emptive war. We automatically assume certain rules and limitations of that conflict when we do.

Our society is not (and never really has been) wired for imperial success. We do great when have overwhelming moral cause. We almost always have to be attacked first - that's just a fact, like it or not. If we start the war and it's not finished within 3 years, then we run into problems.

You blame the media, I blame poor leadership. But we both seem to agree with the premise that when you go to war, you need to go for overwhelming victory - none of this tinkering around bullshit and wishful thinking.

 

[JCDunkDogs]

I think we all agree with that. That might be the most important factor in all this. Our leaders should recognize this. It's why we strategically are in big trouble when we start a pre-emptive war. We automatically assume certain rules and limitations of that conflict when we do.

Our society is not (and never really has been) wired for imperial success. We do great when have overwhelming moral cause. We almost always have to be attacked first - that's just a fact, like it or not. If we start the war and it's not finished within 3 years, then we run into problems.

You blame the media, I blame poor leadership. But we both seem to agree with the premise that when you go to war, you need to go for overwhelming victory - none of this tinkering around bullshit and wishful thinking.

Couldn't have said it better myself, at the risk of being labeled "seditious."