[DMCForum] Reply #2: Intel on Iraq. Where do you get it, really? (Greg)
From: "content22207" <brobertson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:37:35 -0000
Well of course our military is the only one dropping laser guided
munitions. That's not the point.
The point is: these soldiers (sailors/airmen) have been placed into a
extremely chaotic situation (which leads to accidents like shooting
unarmed demonstrators), are inadequately supported (we're depending on
Iraqi's themselves for intelligence and translation, which leads to
blowing up every house EXCEPT the one Al Sadr, or whoever the "card"
of the week happens to be, is hiding in), do not have proper equipment
(wives at Bragg have been holding fund raisers to buy their husbands
the body armor Uncle George forgot to send them to Iraq with), etc.
This whole adventure has been a botched job from the very beginning.
So who do you fault? Members of the military themselves, or their
elected leadership? I choose the latter. Have you noticed more and
more senior military commanders are doing the same...
As I said -- the days of spitting on vets are over.
Don't blame me if you missed George the Younger's recent activation of
the Individual Ready Reserve. These guys (and gals) haven't worn a
uniform in years. They don't do PT or any other sort of ongoing
training. Many are in their 30's and 40's. They are truly less
prepared to go to Iraq than National Guard members. Yet the
administration has already called 6,000 to go to Iraq. With a pool of
100,000 to draw from, no telling how many more will get called if it's
re-elected.
Re: the B-2 -- oh please. That's wasted money if I ever saw it. Who
was responsible for dreaming up an airplane that can't get wet! What
forms the backbone of the Strategic Bomber Command? The venerable
B-52, which coincidentally celebrates its 50th birthday next month
(don't give me any crap about driving old cars!). Kind of like the
ancient C-141's and C-130's that still form the backbone of the
Strategic Airlift Command. Navy SEALs are still launching their rafts
from CH-47's. Air Force is still refuelling from KC-135's. Notice a
pattern here? Congressmen desperate to route jobs to their respective
states buy the military a lot of expensive new crap that simply
doesn't work. Thank God they kept the old stuff.
Re: Bin Laden -- he's in Afghanistan (or at least he was before George
the Younger got distracted by Iraq). Actually disliked Sadam Hussein's
feigned religiousness intensely and chose not to work with the man or
his regime. Iran's Mullahs, however, were another story. Woke up this
morning to read that the September 11 highjackers passed through Iran
on their way to the US. Al Qaeda has training camps in Iran too. It's
beginning to look like the administration sent troops to invade the
wrong country...
Bill Robertson
#5939
>--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "timnagin" <timnagin@xxxx> wrote:
> >Please note: no one is criticizing the military. We are criticizing
> >its civilian leadership for misusing such a valuable resource.
>
>
> Huh? No criticism of the military? Didn't you mention the military
killing
> people at a wedding party?
>
>
> ><snip>
> >Considering the casualties, bizarre mobilizations (has anyone noticed
> >George the Younger is now pressing into service ex-soldiers who
> >haven't worn a uniform in years and tip the upper limits of age
> >appropriateness), dangerous precedent of violating international
> >treaties to which we are signatory, etc, etc, etc, an objective
> >observer would have to conclude the administration has totally misused
> >the military entrusted to it.
>
>
> "Pressing into service..."? Where did you hear this? This, I would
like to
> read about. Someone on here just recently talked about coming home from
> Iraq.
>
>
> >BTW: Until its WMD claims were exposed as false, not once did the
> >administration ever mention invading Iraq to accomplish humanitarian
> >good. Every single pre-invasion protestation revolved around weapons,
> >and programs, that simply did not exist. Makes the civilian leadership
> >look reckless now.
>
>
> If they were trying to create the existence of WMD then why didn't they
> stage a 'find'? Maybe, just maybe, their intelligence was really
inaccurate
> and they considered what they had to be credible evidence. Shocking
> possibility, isn't it?
>
>
> >Most Americans want to see their soldiers (sailors, airmen) PROPERLY
> >cared for. That includes buying them equipment they truly need (not
> >Star Wars),
>
>
> Yea, wouldn't want them to be able to strike a position from the
other side
> of the globe. Do you know what the B-2, at least what is publicly
known,
> can do?
>
> Space-based things are only useful for sending reports back to the
evening
> news.
>
> I remember hearing someone of the Iraqi army, or whatever, saying the
> Americans were too chicken to get close enough so they could be
fired upon.
> Chicken? Not hardly... but the US military can take that guy out
from miles
> away and he will never even have a clue as to what hit him.
>
>
> >paying them fairly (I live within earshot of Ft. Bragg,
> >where a fantastic percentage of the soldiers receive welfare
> >assistance and live in substandard housing -- rediculous), not
> >treating the VA like a care denying HMO (doubly rediculous), and above
> >all: not mobilizing them on a whim or wild goose chase.
>
>
> Do you mean Iraq was a whim or wild goose chase? I guess we need to
tell
> bin laden's second in command, and the others, that it was all a
joke and he
> is free to go.
>
> Oh, something I wanted to mention in a previous thread. Does anyone
know
> how many times the Pentagon was attacked and damaged? I can assure
you it
> was more than the once in 2001, but that never came up.
>
> Greg
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN