Looks like the troops are getting tired of Rumsfeld's $h!t.

I disagree with Red,
It really ticks me off that just because he's against the war in Iraq he compares it to
Vietnam.
If you are wrong in the future you have a lot of crow to eat my friend!

So the answer to someone who dislikes this president and this war is to want more troops in Iraq, if we had them there you would then be saying something else when
another scenario happens like:
More troops in Iraq would mean more of them could be targeted and then possibly more
dead, what would you say then.
You dislike this war and Bush, Rumsfeld so much that you compare them to Johnson, McNamara, too early for that Amigo.
BTW, imho, Johnson was the worst president ever, another democrat that couldn't run
a war.
I haven't seen this president bomb trees and forests with nothing else there.

Vietnam war casualty figures:
58,226 American soldiers also died in the war or are missing in action. Australia lost
http://www.vietnam-war.info/casualties/
http://www.vietnam-war.info/
How many dead in Iraq?

You say we shouldn't have gone in to Iraq so you were happy with the status quo:
Lets look at what that was.

1) UN Oil for Food, The UN, France, Germany siding with Saddam, monies involved, illegal weapons.
You are happy if we never found out about this Amigo?

2)Anyone against this war always leaves out the terrorist camps found in Iraq, Saddam
was sponsering terrorists and funding them in the West bank at least.
There was also proof that Al Quada was in Iraq at some point before and after we invaded even though i don't guess there was any proof Saddam was sponsering them.

3) Saddams forces shooting at our planes in the no fly zone?
What would you say if they were able to bring down a plane?

In retrospect of these facts what should we have done?

We lost the Vietnam war at home and not overseas thanks to the Liberal media and if
we lose this in Iraq it will be because of the media blowing events out of proportion
and running with stories when they are under investigation by the military such as
Abu-Ghrab, etc.

Quote:
The military advised against invading Iraq, then when ordered they advised that more troops would be needed.

Hmm, 1 man, General Shenseki?
I don't know much about this but maybe that was a good thing?
Sometimes change is needed such as positions when a new president comes on board
or second term changes.

Your way too early Red in coming to a conclusion about the Iraqi War.
Only time and history will tell the truth.
Its funny in the Vietnam War time period, you wouldn't be writing on the Internet in the comfort of your home but theres a good chance you would have been drafted unlike today.

Let me just say I don't agree with everything Bush has done nor will I defend him for everything, I would've pulled a Truman "anywhere" Al-Quada or Terrorism is known to
be because its a sickness and disease that isn't so easily changed when it is programmed from birth.
Maybe Bush is doing it the only "civil" way possible but I'm not happy with all the monies and debt its costing us, I haven't listed "lives" in this because we haven't lost
that many but saying this I would have did the Truman thing to get back as many of those lives as possible.

The true story is the liberal media and some in this country is against the miltary and will do anything possible to discredit it to further their agenda, not talking about you Red with this paragraph.

 

1 more important point, its not the end of the world, we went through this same scenario in WWII.
Nazi, Germany, we occupied that country and the ss went into hiding and came out in
civilian clothes using terrorist tactics to attack us.
WE WON!
The media and papers claimed back then that we were losing the peace and the war.

History repeats itself and it aint always Vietnam :dis:

The same time the Japanese were beheading some of our soldiers.
We brought that to an end real fast and WON!

Red must have forgotten about this?

 

This will be a quick reply. Saban possibly leaving is far more important than this stuff. :thumb:

I knew the answer to that question and I definitely knew you did as well.

That's kind of what I meant. The difference is that I don't think America will turn like it did back then, and that the casualties will not come even close to where they were in Vientnam.

I could go on for days on Iraq and why it was right, and I have numerous times on this board. My reasons have nothing to do with Iraq and their non-connection to 9/11, or the Iraq and Al Qeada connection, which there is - not a large one, but there is one. But like I said, Saban is more important right now.

 

Red,
1) I didn't guarantee you anything, You are the one denying reality if you deny that there weren't terrorist camps in Iraq and there were some Al Quada members in Iraq
just like they are all over the world.
Ah, I saw news reports on tv, msnbc and fox news reports about terrorist camps
in Iraq and some Al Quada members there, not hard to find.

About WMD's in Iraq, even the UN certified that they were there and they just don't disappear overnight.
The last time we went to war he flew his air force to Syria, They are probably in Syria
and Iran if not still in Iraq.
I will say this, you look at everything about this war and wmds in the short term of history, like i said earlier, only time will tell who's right, theres no guarantee you are right or that I am for that matter.

How is it that there were none in Iraq when they have been in almost every country all over the world?

2) We are in Iraq because of WMD's supposedly, we also found drones there being produced during the war, saw coverage on msnbc and fox news that were against
the UN resolutions.
We are also there because of the terrorist camps in Iraq which you don't believe were there, you don't have to challenge me, its up to you to be informed.
I watched all the coverage of the war and heard and saw reports of terrorist camps.
You don't believe it, thats your problem not mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
yea, Red , I love war, it makes the economy boom!
Just Kidding to liten things a bit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) Raghead? Bush, Rumsfeld? I guess.
I'm not sticking up for them, I would have done things a lot different my friend plus its
the lessor of 2 evils as far as I'm concerned.
We couldn't afford to have Kerry pull us out of there like Clinton did in Somalia.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The media did help us lose Resolve and lose the war in Vietnam, we won every battle over there.
I see you haven't read General Giaps memoirs.
"Even Giap admitted in his memoirs that news media reporting of the war and the antiwar demonstrations that ensued in America surprised him. Instead of negotiating what he called a conditional surrender, Giap said they would now go the limit because America's resolve was weakening and the possibility of complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp."
It's right there Amigo!!!!
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040415-090923-9426r

 

1 more thing, why does everything have to be compared to Vietnam?
I'm hoping 1 day we can let this ghost go.
AND
I noticed you didn't dispute anything I had to say about WWII Germany and Japan
and the same thing happening then and there has happened in and about us in Iraq.

Steak dinner is on Red! :grin: :thumb: :lol:

 

i dont say much about this, because i dont know much about it.

but i just talked to my old man on the phone (its my birthday today) he seems pretty critical of rumsfeld, and i trust his judgement. he is a retired officer who served for 20 years. also, his son-in-law, my bro-in-law isnt so excited about rumsfeld either. he is military intel and he just returned from afghanistan, where my dad just told me he was a few miles from pat tillman for the battle that killed him. he has now returned to the us and just moved from ft bragg to ft polk to train kids in urban military tactics. anyways, my dad and my bro in law both are bush supporters and are not big fans of rumsfeld, so i am beginning to respect the opinion that the war is not being managed all that perfectly. the only thing i can understand is that some of the criticism seems legit, and also that i am not qualified to make much of a judgement on it.

also apparently my bro in law and tillman and those guys have known where bin laden is for some time, and cannot get him for some reason i couldnt understand when my dad explained it to me. apparently the problem is with pro bin-laden pakistanis or something complicated.

however, that said, i realize that wars are just big cluster****s, and no one really knows exactly how things are gonna go.