The Siren of Defeatism The visionless Kerry is his own worst enemy.

**Gunslinger** · September 29th, 2004, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by reason:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />We are stretched thin because of the liberals slashing the defense budget in the mid 90's.

Ok, you're missing a point here. You don't declare a war if you don't have the adequate resources, manpower and a coherent plan to win it.

It wasn't that long ago that Mr. Bush stood on an aircraft carrier and declared "Mission Accomplished!"

This statement pretty much defines the Bush administration. He didn't know what he was getting into, and he doesn't know how to get out of it.

His father apparently knew better.

I've argued that I can come up with good reasons to invade Iraq. I supported it. The problem is Mr. Bush has never come up with any coherent reason, much less any coherent plan.

I would argue that manpower and training is less a budget issue than it is a defined policy issue.

How many men could the cost of one satellite guided missile pay for and train in the expertise in guerilla desert terrorist warfare?

Right now we don't need $1mm guided missiles. We need men who can fight in the desert.<hr /></blockquote>1) The "Mission Accopmlished" banner was put their by the Captain of the ship he landed on so the families of the Sailors and Marines on board would know that their loved ones did what they set out to do.

2) If 'daddy' knew what he was doing he would have let us march on Bagdhad when we had a chance back in '91.

3) Unless you have served, I don't wanna hear about 'training for this' or 'training for that'. I know what we train for and how we train for it. Do you?

(edited to add the following)
Right now the vast majority of fighting is not in the desert, but in city streets, so what good would desert training do when it is actually urban warfare the Marines and soldiers are doing? Oh and before you ask, the Marines and Army have extensive urban warfare training.

[ September 29, 2004 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Gunslinger ]

**reason** · September 29th, 2004, 04:52 PM

If 'daddy' knew what he was doing he would have let us march on Bagdhad when we had a chance back in '91.

According to today's Enquirer, in 1992, Dick Cheney said George the First did exactly the right thing.

**gae** · September 29th, 2004, 07:55 PM

Only because they didn't have enough organic food to feed the troops.

**reason** · September 29th, 2004, 08:08 PM

Right now the vast majority of fighting is not in the desert, but in city streets, so what good would desert training do when it is actually urban warfare the Marines and soldiers are doing? Oh and before you ask, the Marines and Army have extensive urban warfare training.

Peacekeepers

Foreign Policy Research Institute

I found the second article particularly interesting, because I think it highlights Bush major, glaring shortcomings. Bush isn't exactly worldly, nor does he seem to be the type concerned about the nitty gritty of the Iraqi people.

[ September 29, 2004 05:16 PM: Message edited by: reason ]

**reason** · September 29th, 2004, 08:19 PM

Originally posted by Gunslinger:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by reason:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />The Marines who are around Fallujah have found all kinds of goodies there hidden in the sand, but you don't hear about that do you?

Please itemize.<hr /></blockquote>Jets, rockets that exceeded the 93 mile limitation placed on Iraq by the UN at the end of the 1st Gulf War, a tunnel system that connects to Bagdhad and the Bagdhad Airport, some interesting chemicals and mobile labs.

But the liberal media sees fit NOT to tell us about all this.<hr /></blockquote>The Wall Street Journal did. I'll have to go back and check the reasons why, but those missiles were less a threat than Bush wanted them to be.

Despite how "interesting" those labs are, there has only been evidence that Hussein desired to start illegal programs, not that he actually carried them out.

I don't see how a tunnel violates anything.

**LanDroid** · September 29th, 2004, 11:51 PM

"The U.S. took out the Taliban in Afghanistan."

Heh, compare that wishful thinking with the following quote from a commie Bush-hater.

"The greatest threat in the country remains Al Qaida, Taliban and other indigenous military groups. These groups operate mostly on the Pakistan border and in the south. U.S., coalition and Afghan combat forces are positioned and employed to defeat these threats."
- Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) 9/23/04

I wonder why it is A-OK that we abandoned Afghanistan (how would you like to live there?), but if we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win? Perhaps the message is that our withdrawal from Iraq will require an invasion of Iran or North Korea as a distraction...

Kerry may correctly state that Iraq has become a haven for terrorists. But we have engaged the forces of Islamo-fascism and terrorism on their turf rather than ours. Surely this has made America safer.

I kinda like Kudlow & Cramer, but this statement is like wearing a sash that says "I'm a bonehead".

[ September 29, 2004 08:53 PM: Message edited by: LanDroid ]

**travelinman** · September 30th, 2004, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by reason:
Ok, you're missing a point here. You don't declare a war if you don't have the adequate resources, manpower and a coherent plan to win it.

So what your saying is:

Washington should have surrendered at Valley Forge.

FDR should have surrendered to the Japanese after Pearl Harbor

Thread: The Siren of Defeatism The visionless Kerry is his own worst enemy.

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions