Duty, Honor, Country

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
#21
True, but they were also put in the position where a) they were voting with their emotions instead of their rational and b) all that Joe Sixpack knows is that anyone that isn't pro-Bush is anti-america. That second one reminds me of a certain misc forum on a certain orange message board. Anyway I think the sad fact about the patriot act is the number of legislators that voted on it without reading it. Hopefully that was a sort of wake-up call for them.
 

Donnyboy

Lettin' the high times carry the low....
A/V Subscriber
Oct 31, 2005
25,703
22,524
1,743
#22
We are on some common ground here but when one makes a mistake one should acknowledge said mistake and if they have learned the error of their ways illustrate the lesson.

What is going on within Washington in both parties right now is self preservation and has nothing to do with what is best for the nation.....anymore than it did on 9/12. If you were the honorable senator B. Don'tfalldown of the Leftican party and I am pres. D. Boy of the Rightocrats party and I take us into a war you supported and now oppose the proper response would be to say this is why I supported D. Boy then and here is why I oppose it now oh and here is what we could do to resolve it. What is being done is to say pres. D. Boy is an unintelligent liar who duped me into supporting a war we have lost that I will stop paying for......and he doesn't like minorities and causes natural disasters. It is self preservation and it is sickening at an all time level.
 
#23
dictatorial power? please tell me what this is. as I understand it, the President has done what is within his constitutional rights.

we've been over this many times, the information was the best we had at the time. you cannot use hindsight to say that we made the wrong decision. how would we have known it was wrong? and many people disagree that it was wrong anyway. Congress made the decision. If they wanted better information, then they should have asked for it. everybody was gung ho at the outset anyway, so you can't reflect the same views today.

you missed the point of the whole article.

The point of the article is that we are making progress in Iraq! So to pull out right now or anytime in the near future completely undermines all that we have accomlished there. Then our dead soldiers would have really died in vain.
The only thing worse than making the wrong decision is realizing that you made the wrong decision and then doing nothing to change it.

Also, I'm not sure about this progress you speak of. Yeah, yeah, troop surge....its isn't working. Did you see about the benchmarks? Hell the last email forward that OSU Sig posted said that Iraq was churning out 3000 troops and 2 special forces units every 6 weeks...and thats circa 2003, so by now we should be outnumbered by Iraqi forces. They still haven't passed the division of oil royalties legislation and you can bet all of the farms you want that Bush won't sign any legislation redeploying our troops (peace or not) until they get that hammered out.
 

okstateguy987

Teamo Supremo
May 7, 2007
12,885
2
668
#24
We are on some common ground here but when one makes a mistake one should acknowledge said mistake and if they have learned the error of their ways illustrate the lesson.

What is going on within Washington in both parties right now is self preservation and has nothing to do with what is best for the nation.....anymore than it did on 9/12. If you were the honorable senator B. Don'tfalldown of the Leftican party and I am pres. D. Boy of the Rightocrats party and I take us into a war you supported and now oppose the proper response would be to say this is why I supported D. Boy then and here is why I oppose it now oh and here is what we could do to resolve it. What is being done is to say pres. D. Boy is an unintelligent liar who duped me into supporting a war we have lost that I will stop paying for......and he doesn't like minorities and causes natural disasters. It is self preservation and it is sickening at an all time level.
Which is exactly why parties need to go.
 

okstateguy987

Teamo Supremo
May 7, 2007
12,885
2
668
#25
The only thing worse than making the wrong decision is realizing that you made the wrong decision and then doing nothing to change it.

Also, I'm not sure about this progress you speak of. Yeah, yeah, troop surge....its isn't working. Did you see about the benchmarks? Hell the last email forward that OSU Sig posted said that Iraq was churning out 3000 troops and 2 special forces units every 6 weeks...and thats circa 2003, so by now we should be outnumbered by Iraqi forces. They still haven't passed the division of oil royalties legislation and you can bet all of the farms you want that Bush won't sign any legislation redeploying our troops (peace or not) until they get that hammered out.
It isn't working? I wish you would spare me the time and effort to counter this, as it seems so menial, but alas, I have to be off, maybe I'll pick it later today....
 
#27
Any news report on any news channel (not fox news) during any news cast at any time of the day. What has really changed since March? OK they have started reporting every brown person that dies in Iraq as an Al Qeada death...I'll give you that. Have bombings gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Have troop casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no)Have civilian casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Has the Iraqi government done anything to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Does Bush begging for more time indicate a sucessful surge? (you get the picture)
 

OSU Sig

Federal Marshal
Jan 28, 2005
15,939
3,111
1,743
66
Edmond
#28
Any news report on any news channel (not fox news) during any news cast at any time of the day. What has really changed since March? OK they have started reporting every brown person that dies in Iraq as an Al Qeada death...I'll give you that. Have bombings gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Have troop casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no)Have civilian casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Has the Iraqi government done anything to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Does Bush begging for more time indicate a sucessful surge? (you get the picture)
Opinions, all and wrong ones at that. All the things you are describing are happening. You choose not to see them.
 

OSU Sig

Federal Marshal
Jan 28, 2005
15,939
3,111
1,743
66
Edmond
#30
Any news report on any news channel (not fox news) during any news cast at any time of the day. What has really changed since March? OK they have started reporting every brown person that dies in Iraq as an Al Qeada death...I'll give you that. Have bombings gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Have troop casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no)Have civilian casualties gone down enough to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Has the Iraqi government done anything to indicate a sucessful surge? (no) Does Bush begging for more time indicate a sucessful surge? (you get the picture)
How much of a decrease is enough for you? Would you have preferred to see continual increases? Would that make you feel better about your bitter position on all this? Give it a rest. There's a war going on and people die. We're in the middle of a surge that is working. Gen. Petraeus said casulties could increase in the short term but this plan is working. Don't you want the US to succeed? Do you really want us to lose?
 
#31
How about any? I think any decreases in the violence in Iraq would be progress. Hint...its not going to happen. Violence in Iraq has little to do with us (other than we instigated it). We pull out? The civil war rages on. We Stay in? The civil war rages on. Wait...the troop surge that has been going since February needs more time.

Everything other than the 1st sentence is ludicrous and will get no repsonse.
 

Pokefan

Territorial Marshal
Aug 3, 2004
8,661
39
1,678
67
Between Pryor and Adair on Beautiful Lake Hudson
#32
OSUsig and 987

The facts are Congress was presented BAD information by the Presidents Administration. They made a decision based on the information provided. If this were an investment firm and the prospectus provided information that far off from reality they'd be in jail for fraud. Yet you keep blaming the Investor for not having the right info. (maybe a bad analogy but what I came up with on no coffee early in the AM)

What we've done is get stuck DEEP in a quagmire. The only solution offered by the right is 'stay the course" but we don't have a FREAKING course other then an endless parade of casualties coming home or being buried in Iraq. Bush's exit strategy is to finish his term, exit office and let the next President deal with HIS mess. Thats the only course of action I can see happening.
In the mean time we try various strategies, US soldiers get killed, and wounded. Iraqi Civilians soldiers police get killed and wounded, We kill lots of enemies and it goes on and on and on and on and on.

We've hashed and rehashed this same argument over and over. You are quite simply not going to change anyones mind on this. Nor are Kaje and MY buildings and Myself, going to change anyone's mind.
 

okstateguy987

Teamo Supremo
May 7, 2007
12,885
2
668
#33
How about any? I think any decreases in the violence in Iraq would be progress. Hint...its not going to happen. Violence in Iraq has little to do with us (other than we instigated it). We pull out? The civil war rages on. We Stay in? The civil war rages on. Wait...the troop surge that has been going since February needs more time.

Everything other than the 1st sentence is ludicrous and will get no repsonse.
The troop surge was just completed less than a month ago with all of the troops arriving less than a month ago. You sir are not paying attention to the facts. A troop surge will take more than just a few weeks to better secure Iraq. We did not instigate violence in Iraq. It's been there since the beginning of man. We are just trying to put an end to it. And it's not merely a civil war anymore. The shiite militias are not as active as they were before. The violence now is mostly al-Quaida.

You make it seem like Iraq was an innocent little school girl who was just minding her own business one day when a big mean man jumped out of the bushes an pounced on her. HAHA, not at all. Iraq was a menace to the world while Saddam was in power, and nobody could tell whether or not he was actually going to carry through with his threats. Saddam's regime needed to go.
 
#34
How long do troop surges take to work? years?...or until they pass the oil royalties resolution. The final troops arrived over a month ago. The first troops of the surge were deployed in Feb. Since then (Feb 2007) the US casualties, coalition casualties, Iraqi casualties, civilian casualties & contractor casualties have all risen. Thats security. Pouring more troops into the meat grinder isn't the answer. The civil war that has been brewing since 1921 is not our fault...its not our fight. Saddam had that on lock down, but now that there is no ruling class then it is chaos...and probably will be forever. They will continue to kill each other whether we are there or not. The only difference is that after we leave CNN will stop reporting every iraqi death as al qaeda.
 

Pokefan

Territorial Marshal
Aug 3, 2004
8,661
39
1,678
67
Between Pryor and Adair on Beautiful Lake Hudson
#35
As long as he is not there and HE does not have to serve, 987 is perfectly willing to suffer losses to protect his security. Institute a Draft and make him go and he may very well change his tune. The idea of Large force increases to secure a country did not work in Vietnam. We went all the way up to 550,000 men and still lost. The Russians had like 100,000 in Afghanistan and it did not work. So what are we looking at? going to 160,000 then saying well it's not working go to 200,000. Then 300,000.

You see a big part of the problem is Bush went in with a VERY undersized force.
Ignoring the advice of many Generals who said they needed more troops.
Now after 5 years suddenly we are going to let the military decide on force size.
Flip Flop Flip Flop.
 

OSU Sig

Federal Marshal
Jan 28, 2005
15,939
3,111
1,743
66
Edmond
#36
How about any? I think any decreases in the violence in Iraq would be progress. Hint...its not going to happen. Violence in Iraq has little to do with us (other than we instigated it). We pull out? The civil war rages on. We Stay in? The civil war rages on. Wait...the troop surge that has been going since February needs more time.

Everything other than the 1st sentence is ludicrous and will get no repsonse.
You didn't answer my questions although that doesn't surprise me.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,122
32,341
1,743
oklahoma city
#38
On that we are in total agreement.
I disagree. While I will likely never believe that it was the right move to go into Iraq when we did, I have changed my mind somewhat on the current situation. Six months ago I thought there was no glimmer of hope for a successful resolution. If some of the reports that I have heard are true that the Sunni insurgents are getting tired of Al Queada and their heinous ways I think there is now a better chance of a good resolution to this situation. If we can further fragment those fighting against us or turn the Sunnis insurgents against the Sunni terrorists then maybe a peaceful outcome can be developed.
How much of this change is due to our troop surge versus just coincidence is not a question that I can answer.

If none of you guys are open to the slightest possibility of changing your minds, what exactly the point of posting?
 

okstateguy987

Teamo Supremo
May 7, 2007
12,885
2
668
#39
As long as he is not there and HE does not have to serve, 987 is perfectly willing to suffer losses to protect his security. Institute a Draft and make him go and he may very well change his tune. The idea of Large force increases to secure a country did not work in Vietnam. We went all the way up to 550,000 men and still lost. The Russians had like 100,000 in Afghanistan and it did not work. So what are we looking at? going to 160,000 then saying well it's not working go to 200,000. Then 300,000.

You see a big part of the problem is Bush went in with a VERY undersized force.
Ignoring the advice of many Generals who said they needed more troops.
Now after 5 years suddenly we are going to let the military decide on force size.
Flip Flop Flip Flop.
I kinda resent this, and it's very demeaning of you. I actually considered going into the ROTC before I chose to college. If there was a draft today, I would probably be drafted as an engineer, and would gladly serve my country in that capacity. You are simply attacking me on a personal basis, and lying about it at the same time. I am thankful of the sacrifice that grown men have decided to take defending this country. I respect them greatly for that. For you to insinuate that I have complete disregard for how many die is complete nonsense. I would not whine my way out of a draft as you perhaps would. I don't disrespect my country like that.

BTW, it takes time for a surge to work, maybe not years, but hell, its only been less than a month and you people are jumping all over it ready to scream defeat. There are currently reports all over the place out there that say the surge is working. Where do you ever hear of it not working? Pokefan, your parameters for a successful surge are not the same as the military's I would bet, and I would also bet that they know a hell of a lot more about it than you.

Again, pointing out past "mistakes" does not help us move forward, and does not help us win.
 

Pokefan

Territorial Marshal
Aug 3, 2004
8,661
39
1,678
67
Between Pryor and Adair on Beautiful Lake Hudson
#40
I am not going to change my mind that going in was the right thing to do, or that up to now the war has been managed in an effective way up to this point.

I AM hopeful that some way can be found to make this workable. I would welcome that no matter who came up with it. I could not care less as to which political party they belonged to. As long as it ends this mess with a positive outcome for the US and the people of Iraq then we are good. I just don't see us on that course at this time. BUT if things continue to change then great!

I was going to post an article today about a big massacre in Northern Iraq, and it also listed the casualties from all around Iraq. Decided not to do that as it was just too depressing. The numbers were quite large.