Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Who Among Us Will Do the Board a Great Service

Posted: 06/19/2014 3:21 PM

Who Among Us Will Do the Board a Great Service 


and tell me how stupid, ignorant, unintelligent, obtuse and misinformed I am because I heard Obama`s speech on the Iraqi crisis this afternoon and feel I rank highly among the morons who feel his statements were among the most singularly idiotic in the history of US statesmanship?

 Educate and inform the whole mass of the people.   They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.

Last edited 06/20/2014 3:34 AM by Rocky17

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/19/2014 3:54 PM

Re: Who Among Us Will Do the Board a Great Service 


Better clean up the grammar just a tad, Rock.

My mother used to tell me, "Elwood, in this world, you must be oh, so smart or oh, so nice."  For years I was smart.  I recommend nice.  You may quote me. - Elwood P. Dowd

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/19/2014 4:39 PM

Re: Who Among Us Will Do the Board a Great Service 


Go for a rewrite Rocky. Your sentence is unintelligible although I suspect I understand your take.noidea
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/19/2014 5:39 PM

Re: Who Among Us Will Do the Board a Great Service 


Rocky:  

You are stupid, ignorant, unintelligent, obtuse and misinformed (the Obama speech is irrelevant tongue).  But I still love you, you magnificent bastard.

xoxo,

Don


When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
---Hunter S. Thompson

 

I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never wrong.

---Samuel Goldwyn

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/19/2014 8:12 PM

JUST LIKE THE GOATFICKERS AND ATTY'S TO DODGE WHAT THEY 


KNOW TO BE YOUR QUESTION. ROCKY THIS GUY OBAMA IS MAKING JIMMY CARTER LOOK LIKE LINCOLN AND JEFFERSON.
"...I thought something is brewing inside the head of this Coach. He sees something in me, some kind of raw talent that he can mold. But that's when I felt the handcuffs go on."

Jack Handy

Last edited 06/19/2014 8:12 PM by johnnyo53

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/19/2014 11:13 PM

WTF 


is that a sentence or a brain cramp?  
Rocky17 wrote: and tell me how stupid, ignorant, unintelligent, obtuse and misinformed I am because I heard Obama`s speech on the Iraqi crisis this afternoon and feel he ranks highly among the morons who feel his statements were among the most singularly idiotic in the history of US statesmanship?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 3:37 AM

Yes, I Screwed up the Sentence Upon Rereading It 


and made a correction but I must be pretty dumb because I feel a whole bunch of people are going to die because of our new Iraq "policy"

I agree with everyone who feels we never should have gone into Iraq and rebuilt the country, but once there, you cannot unscramble an egg.  George Bush was honorable but took on an almost impossible task.  But with Japan, Germany and Korea, the peace is still there because we kept residual forces.  I do believe our President is ignorant of our history and the precedents set in past conflicts that have kept the peace. President Obama will someday look at the result of his actions and inaction in Iraq and will realize he ended up causing the demise of more people than George Bush or Dick Cheney.  This policy is just inexplicable as was the Presidential statement yesterday.

 Educate and inform the whole mass of the people.   They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.

Last edited 06/20/2014 4:25 AM by Rocky17

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 6:37 AM

Re: Yes, I Screwed up the Sentence Upon Rereading It 



Rocky17 wrote: ......This policy is just inexplicable as was the Presidential statement yesterday.
Rocky, I think you are off the reservation on this one.  I think the President's statement contained important and valuable information; in fact I hope very much he actually believes it:

"Above all, Iraqi leaders must rise above their differences and come together around a political plan for Iraq’s futureShia, Sunni, Kurds -- all Iraqis -- must have confidence that they can advance their interests and aspirations through the political process rather than through violenceNational unity meetings have to go forward to build consensus across Iraq’s different communities.  Now that the results of Iraq’s recent election has been certified, a new parliament should convene as soon as possible.  The formation of a new government will be an opportunity to begin a genuine dialogue and forge a government that represents the legitimate interests of all Iraqis."

"Now, it’s not the place for the United States to choose Iraq’s leaders.  It is clear, though, that only leaders that can govern with an inclusive agenda are going to be able to truly bring the Iraqi people together and help them through this crisis.  Meanwhile, the United States will not pursue military options that support one sect inside of Iraq at the expense of another.  There’s no military solution inside of Iraq, certainly not one that is led by the United States.  But there is an urgent need for an inclusive political process, a more capable Iraqi security force, and counterterrorism efforts that deny groups like ISIL a safe haven."

I hope the President pursues the same approach domestically over his remaining term.  Unfortunately, I am not sure anyone believes President Obama any longer.  I saw a report that Maliki was seen running around his office brandishing a pen and a phone?

Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever plus a minute more;
May fortune sing you her sweet song; to live and love way past long
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 7:33 AM

Re: Yes, I Screwed up the Sentence Upon Rereading It 


The quotes from the Poseur in Chief are pie in the sky dreams.  Shia, Sunni and Kurds are NOT going to suddenly grow up and get together to sing Kumbaya around the Iraqi campfire.  They have hated each other for millennia and any 20th century designation of "Iraqi's" isn't worth one kilo of dried Camel dung.

Split the country up and initiate a perennial program to supply basic ammo to whichever faction is losing.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 7:39 AM

Wish Mr. Miller Was Correct, But I Have to Believe BDCF 


Without our presence, nothing good is going to come of the Obama policy but tens of thousands of deaths, future Mideast wars and a terrorist state much worse than the two we spent a decade dismantling...........

 Educate and inform the whole mass of the people.   They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.

Last edited 06/20/2014 7:40 AM by Rocky17

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 7:57 AM

Rocky Answer Me This 


Why should we let Obama go back in?  On what basis do any of you Hawks think he should be allowed to lead our young men and women back in to that craphole?

our state of grace is gone.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 8:10 AM

I Really Do Not Consider Myself a Hawk, Just Pragmatic 


I will repeat that I was dead set against the Iraqi intervention.  And I`ve answered your question many times.  We should have insisted on a status of forces agreement this time around.  We had the power to do so.  Obama wanted out for his own domestic political reasons.  The lack of a presence created the vacuum that ISIS filled, spilling over from Syria as our foreign policy gurus sat on their hands and watched and did nothing. 

At this point, we should and could degrade ISIS severely without ever having to put anyone into Iraq except some special forces guys who could direct air power from the ground.  ISIS may not be pushed back, but they could be stopped in their tracks and it would give us time to help the Iraqis regain territory if they had the stomach for it.  Most importantly, it would deny ISIS the comfort and sanctuary to develop a full blown terror base from which export terrorism en masse.

Our options are not great because of our feckless foreign policy under Obama but his behavior and policy are what one would expect from an ivory tower ideologue with no pragmatic experience other than left wing projective theory.

 Educate and inform the whole mass of the people.   They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.

Last edited 06/20/2014 8:17 AM by Rocky17

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 8:24 AM

Doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing 


Roscoe -

The short answer is, we can ignore that craphole; that craphole is not going to ignore us.  And the organization currently running this particular craphole is the most violent and capable terrorist organization in history.  ISIS is the terrorist organization AQD aspired to be.  

One of the first laws of crisis management is, don't act for the sake of acting.  The military planning version of this is, don't do anything unless you know what and why you are doing it.  That does not guarantee success, but it does force coherence between what you want to do and what you are doing.  Inaction might make things worse; the wrong action will ALWAYS make things worse. 

So I am perfectly open to the idea that doing nothing is better than doing the wrong something.

With that said - ISIS is a worse version of AQD.  They are better organized, more disciplined, more numerous, better financed, and with a phenomenally effective strategy - there is complete coherence between their religious philosophy, and their military / governance strategy.  There is none of the cult of personality which limited the effectiveness of AQD.  

In other words - I know exactly what doing nothing in this craphole will accomplish;  it will give ISIS the room to continue growing, absorbing smaller, less organized outfits, and establish their own nation state.   They already have done this, to a certain extent.  They have not completely consolidated their gains; if we strike them now, we have an opportunity, however slim, to shift power back to the Sunni tribes and away from ISIS.    The Sunni tribes originally gave some measure of support to AQI; eventually we turned them.  If the Sunni tribes align with ISIS, it will be the worst possible outcome for us. 

I have very little trust in Barack Obama as Commander in Chief.  He doesn't want to be involved, he wants to ignore it, his base instinct is that America is to blame for this current situation, he gives the appearance of being aggrieved that he has to deal with this.  Still, I have to believe that he is a rational actor and if his military advisers explain the situation, he will do the right thing.  

Letting ISIS continue to grow and consolidate will lead to a fully organized, philosophically coherent caliphate with a conventional military and an unending supply of suicide bombers.  

roscoemaynard wrote: Why should we let Obama go back in?  On what basis do any of you Hawks think he should be allowed to lead our young men and women back in to that craphole?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 10:59 AM

If Only You Were In Charge 


because from the very beginning of this fiasco you have indicated we planned badly.  Two Presidencies in a row planning badly is a poor track record.  A reasonable argument can be made that we wouldn't be dealing with ISIS or AQD in Iraq if we had left the Dictator there--much as you indicated taking out Khaddafi was silly.  It really makes you wonder if the last several Sec Defs, going back through Rumsfeld, all seemingly pretty competent guys (especially Gates), were really listened to (assuming they were saying things like, wait, lets plan this thing through a bit better... or what is the rush?).

And I agree they are incredibly dangerous.

our state of grace is gone.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 11:49 AM

Military Questions for Navy.... 



.... my understanding is that ISIS is in a town about 35-40 miles outside Baghdad....

My questions are all military....

Can we attack the presumed convoy when they move with drones?    Can we put up enough drones with enough missiles to take out the convoy?

Or, do we need something like an A-10 warthog to strafe the convoy.   How soon could we get one or two (more?) up in the air to be an effective deterrent.

How would you plan to stop ISIS from achieving those last 35-40 miles?    You've already said they've blended into the civilian population, so we can't bomb them effectively in that small town.... 

So,  what do we do?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 1:33 PM

The Path Not Taken 


If Hussein was in power, it's my own belief that every problem in the Middle East would be worse.

OBL would still be alive and living someplace in Iraq. ISIS probably wouldn't be named 'ISIS', but the personnel would be around, and Hussein could find a use for them. Above all, there's be a three way nuclear arms race (Iran, Iraq, and Israel), and the near certainty of tactical use. No moderate faction in Iran or Israel could possibly gain power in those circumstances.

And all this would be taking place in the face of a United States with demonstrated feebleness.

I think we all have a preference for order over disorder, and that can extend to violence as well (acceptance of State-sanctioned violenc behind the Iron Curtain, Nazi Germany, and other despotic regimes, as opposed to street, or mob violence). But in fact cold, rational organized State violence is much, much more dangerous - never mind that the trains run on time.

As for the rest, I think we'd attained all our objectives by 2010. If we should not change the paradigm in a nation with two cultures so much at odds with each other, that some sort of civil conflict is inevitable, then we should never have fought the War - not the Iraq War, the Revolutionary War, the one that began in 1775. Long ago, our embryonic nation was every bit as divided.

Neither the United States nor any other nation (or human being) can control history - we can only shove it along in a good direction - which is what we did - and then stopped doing.

My mother used to tell me, "Elwood, in this world, you must be oh, so smart or oh, so nice."  For years I was smart.  I recommend nice.  You may quote me. - Elwood P. Dowd

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 2:04 PM

Re: Doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing 


Navy:

What do you think of the Kurd's forming an independent country. They have a strong military and good oil revenue. They might be able to merge with the Syrian Kurds and the Iranian ones. Would that provide an impetus for Iraq to be divided a la Yugoslavia?

It doesn't solve the ISIS issue but it might induce the Sunnis to work out how they also can be independent.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 2:12 PM

Re: Doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing 



GrayhairedCard wrote: Navy:

What do you think of the Kurd's forming an independent country. They have a strong military and good oil revenue. They might be able to merge with the Syrian Kurds and the Iranian ones. Would that provide an impetus for Iraq to be divided a la Yugoslavia?

It doesn't solve the ISIS issue but it might induce the Sunnis to work out how they also can be independent.

good question.  I am not too sure the Turks would be happy with an independent Kurdistan and the likely demands for chunks of eastern Turkey.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 06/20/2014 2:33 PM

Re: Doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing 



GrayhairedCard wrote: Navy:

What do you think of the Kurd's forming an independent country. They have a strong military and good oil revenue. They might be able to merge with the Syrian Kurds and the Iranian ones. Would that provide an impetus for Iraq to be divided a la Yugoslavia?

It doesn't solve the ISIS issue but it might induce the Sunnis to work out how they also can be independent.
The New Map of the Middle East

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 06/20/2014 2:58 PM

Re: Doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing 


Exactly right, otherwise I believe that split off of the Kurds would have happened after the 1990 Gulf War.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >