jcd11235 0 #51 March 14, 2009 Quotehttp://www.asuwebdevil.com/issues/2006/03/21/opinions/696254 I think that this may be a little misguided. Text of a letter that I emailed: In the editorial about Senator McCain's speech, Dianna Nanez claims that America must come together to come up with a plan to get our soldiers out of harms way. However, she needs to know one thing, a good number of our soldiers want to be in harms way. As a veteran of OIF1, I know what I wanted. I wanted to be in harms way if it means that my family might be a little safer at home. I would rather bring the fight to the enemy than wait for the enemy to show up in my hometown. The real question that all americans need to ask is, "what value do I place on the lives of my loved ones?" For me the answer to that question is that I value their lives more than that of the enemy. I value the lives of my family more than the lives of people who are willing to kill, torture, maim, intimidate, harrass and blow up their own people. Being in Iraq is not the best situation, but it is worlds better than having terrorists operating in the USA. Let us not forget the cost of civilians on 9/11. It is incorrect to believe that the insurgents that are fighting over in Iraq are logical thinkers. Their minds are clouded by a religion that declares anyone not of their faith "infidels". If they truly wanted peace in the world they would approach the soldiers and help fight those willing to destroy the peace process. But, in my opinion the fight will go on ad infinitum, as long as there are people willing to die for allah. What does 9/11 have to do with OIF? And what is OIF1 supposed to imply? Are there already plans for OIF2? People fighting an invading and occupying army seems pretty logical to me. Trying to draw a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, OTOH, does not seem logical at all.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #52 March 14, 2009 Quote>The point is that you never know in situations like this. Then others should respect or fear you; don't let them think they may succeed, or they may try. It doesn't appear our invasion and occupation of Iraq has earned us respect from anyone, nor does it appear to have instilled fear in our enemies.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #53 March 14, 2009 QuoteHow many of those attacks were answered by U.S. military force? Clinton went after al Qaeda, and brought many members to justice for previous attacks on US interests, without the need for large scale military force. The Republicans gave him all sorts of grief over it. His successor took office and ignored his warnings of al Qaeda being a threat to the US, virtually ignoring them until the 9/11 attacks. Of course now the history revisionists want to claim that it has been the Republicans who have been tough on OBL and al Qaeda. It's rather ironic that Reagan and GHW Bush willingly funded al Qaeda and other terrorist groups as freedom fighters.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #54 March 15, 2009 Quote What does 9/11 have to do with OIF? And what is OIF1 supposed to imply? Are there already plans for OIF2? People fighting an invading and occupying army seems pretty logical to me. Trying to draw a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, OTOH, does not seem logical at all. And that is because you have no idea of what you are talking about. You have no idea of the coalition we had in there, the people, the work we completed. Just join Billvon on calling us murderers as he usually does. And go eat your cake too. How many Iraqies you know, by the way?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #55 March 15, 2009 QuoteAnd that is because you have no idea of what you are talking about. You have no idea of the coalition we had in there, the people, the work we completed. Just join Billvon on calling us murderers as he usually does. Wow. You completely ignored every point I made in my posts. You also seem to have missed the news when the US military acknowledged that detainees in US custody were victims of homicide. Try to keep up with the facts.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #56 March 15, 2009 QuoteQuoteHow many of those attacks were answered by U.S. military force? Clinton went after al Qaeda, and brought many members to justice for previous attacks on US interests, without the need for large scale military force. The Republicans gave him all sorts of grief over it. His successor took office and ignored his warnings of al Qaeda being a threat to the US, virtually ignoring them until the 9/11 attacks. Of course now the history revisionists want to claim that it has been the Republicans who have been tough on OBL and al Qaeda. It's rather ironic that Reagan and GHW Bush willingly funded al Qaeda and other terrorist groups as freedom fighters. Speaking of revisionist history... why don't you tell me how 'clinton went after AQ' after the following? 1993 - WTC1 1995 - Bombing in Saudi Arabia 1995 - Khobar Towers 1998 - US Embassy bombings in Africa 2000 - USS ColeMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #57 March 15, 2009 QuoteQuoteAnd that is because you have no idea of what you are talking about. You have no idea of the coalition we had in there, the people, the work we completed. Just join Billvon on calling us murderers as he usually does. Wow. You completely ignored every point I made in my posts. You also seem to have missed the news when the US military acknowledged that detainees in US custody were victims of homicide. Try to keep up with the facts. Wow! Now, you are telling us that homicides, according to you, are systemic, which could tell us that your thoughts are that all servicemen, are homicidal. After 6 years, you still do not know what OIF 1 or OIF 2 means, it clearly demonstrates that you have not even bothered to get a simple fact straight, and I will dare to say you will soon say that those people that have been there have only "anecdotal" experiencies that have nothing to do with your "facts" See what happens when you root for us to loose, and now start complaining because we have not fallen in a situation that you expected us to? So much for the defeatist a few years back, where are their comments for recognizing we actually won, despite their wishes for us not to? Men, some things just never change."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #58 March 15, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHow many of those attacks were answered by U.S. military force? Clinton went after al Qaeda, and brought many members to justice for previous attacks on US interests, without the need for large scale military force. The Republicans gave him all sorts of grief over it. His successor took office and ignored his warnings of al Qaeda being a threat to the US, virtually ignoring them until the 9/11 attacks. Of course now the history revisionists want to claim that it has been the Republicans who have been tough on OBL and al Qaeda. It's rather ironic that Reagan and GHW Bush willingly funded al Qaeda and other terrorist groups as freedom fighters. Speaking of revisionist history... why don't you tell me how 'clinton went after AQ' after the following? 1993 - WTC1 1995 - Bombing in Saudi Arabia 1995 - Khobar Towers 1998 - US Embassy bombings in Africa 2000 - USS Cole Do a search. It been discussed previously in the forums. He went after those responsible in the proper manner, as police action, not a full scale war.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #59 March 15, 2009 Quote Now, you are telling us that homicides, according to you, are systemic, which could tell us that your thoughts are that all servicemen, are homicidal. I didn't post anything that could remotely be interpreted as such. Try reading my posts before paraphrasing them, please. Quote After 6 years, you still do not know what OIF 1 or OIF 2 means, it clearly demonstrates that you have not even bothered to get a simple fact straight, and I will dare to say you will soon say that those people that have been there have only "anecdotal" experiencies that have nothing to do with your "facts" The first gulf war in early 1991, in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, was Operation Desert Storm. Our 2003 invasion of Iraq is Operation Iraqi Freedom, or OIF, renamed from Operation Iraqi Liberation, or OIL. We have not yet completed OIF, despite what you may have read on a banner hanging behind Bush on an aircraft carrier parked just off the coast of the US. We're still stuck in the same ill advised war. Quote See what happens when you root for us to loose, and now start complaining because we have not fallen in a situation that you expected us to? Everybody lost in Iraq. The Iraqis lost a stable government and much of their infrastructure, as well as untold thousands of civilian lives. The US has lost thousands of military lives, billions of dollars, as well as credibility and respect among the rest of the world. Quote So much for the defeatist a few years back, where are their comments for recognizing we actually won, despite their wishes for us not to? Where did you possibly get the idea that we won? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #60 March 15, 2009 Were the "heros" that slaughtered the passengers on Iran Air Flight 655 ever brought to book? or did they go home with medals and promotion? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #61 March 15, 2009 Quote Quote Now, you are telling us that homicides, according to you, are systemic, which could tell us that your thoughts are that all servicemen, are homicidal. I didn't post anything that could remotely be interpreted as such. Try reading my posts before paraphrasing them, please. Quote After 6 years, you still do not know what OIF 1 or OIF 2 means, it clearly demonstrates that you have not even bothered to get a simple fact straight, and I will dare to say you will soon say that those people that have been there have only "anecdotal" experiencies that have nothing to do with your "facts" The first gulf war in early 1991, in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, was Operation Desert Storm. Our 2003 invasion of Iraq is Operation Iraqi Freedom, or OIF, renamed from Operation Iraqi Liberation, or OIL. We have not yet completed OIF, despite what you may have read on a banner hanging behind Bush on an aircraft carrier parked just off the coast of the US. We're still stuck in the same ill advised war. Quote See what happens when you root for us to loose, and now start complaining because we have not fallen in a situation that you expected us to? Everybody lost in Iraq. The Iraqis lost a stable government and much of their infrastructure, as well as untold thousands of civilian lives. The US has lost thousands of military lives, billions of dollars, as well as credibility and respect among the rest of the world. Quote So much for the defeatist a few years back, where are their comments for recognizing we actually won, despite their wishes for us not to? Where did you possibly get the idea that we won? Again, a simple fact that you have no idea what is OIF 1-2 etc, and you still go in a tangent, absent from a reality, don't know a thing, but think you do. Been there 3 times, OIF 2, 4 & 5, and know more Iraqies personally, that will beg to differ to your statements. But don't let the facts interrupt you. Now back to your schedule smear/slandering.... And enjoy your cake."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #62 March 15, 2009 QuoteWere the "heros" that slaughtered the passengers on Iran Air Flight 655 ever brought to book? or did they go home with medals and promotion? You're asking the wrong person, although I doubt (but do not know) they faced any serious consequences.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #63 March 15, 2009 And that's your best expertise on knowing what the military does that you want to share with your brilliant eloquence? "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #64 March 15, 2009 Quote Again, a simple fact that you have no idea what is OIF 1-2 etc, and you still go in a tangent, absent from a reality, don't know a thing, but think you do. By all means, explain the difference. We're involved in the same war we started in 2003. On the other hand, WWI and WWII had a noticeable and obvious intervening break in hostilities, even if one argues that said break was merely an intermission in a single war. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong. It would be easy; all you need to do is link to the Congressional authorization for use of force for each of the OIF's, of which you seem to be claiming there are at least five. Absent of those, it's the same war now that it was when it began in 2003.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #65 March 16, 2009 QuoteQuoteAgain, a simple fact that you have no idea what is OIF 1-2 etc, and you still go in a tangent, absent from a reality, don't know a thing, but think you do. We're involved in the same war we started in 2003. It would be easy; all you need to do is link to the Congressional authorization for use of force for each of the OIF's, of which you seem to be claiming there are at least five. Absent of those, it's the same war now that it was when it began in 2003. Suspect he’s referring to the order of battle. I think we’re on OIF-11 (or it might be the 9th ...), i.e., the eleventh rotation of OIF. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #66 March 16, 2009 QuoteSuspect he’s referring to the order of battle. I think we’re on OIF-11 (or it might be the 9th ...), i.e., the eleventh rotation of OIF. /Marg While I trust that you actually know what you're talking about, your link offered no explanation or example of such a numbering system. It referred only to "Operation Iraqi Freedom," as I have. "The Department of Defense announced today that the 34th Infantry Division headquarters, based in Rosemount, Minn., is scheduled to deploy in the spring of 2009 to support Operation Iraqi Freedom."Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
