Who does this guy think he is?!

[heartc]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Or shall we continue what we did over the last 8 years?
Did not really get us anywhere, did it?

It did.

1. There were no more attacks on the US during all that time.

2. The attacks on Madrid and London were EXACTLY designed to exploit the weakness of Western societies and make them vote for governments that would reduce the military threat against the enemy by withdrawing from the fight, and at least in Spain it worked.

3. The West is sitting in Afghanistan, and at least some members of the NATO alliance are engaging the Taliban in earnest, which makes it harder for them to recruit and train in what was an undisturbed safe heaven prior to the invasion. It would make it even harder for them if some of the other NATO members would get off their asses.

4. An enemy of the West with the potential to develop WMDs - maybe falsely identified as being in possession of them, since he was in the past - has been removed, and replaced with further presence of the West in the general area of where the threat originates, which again makes it harder for the enemy to operate, network and rally. The notion that Saddam Hussein was indeed an asset these days because of his secular government style is ridiculous. He might have been in the 80s, but later he was an outspoken enemy and it is ridiculous to believe he did not and would not conspire with other enemies of the West because of their religious background. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Saddam kept them at arms length, but that sure didn't stop him from lending a hand and he sure didn't stop them from conducting their operations. He handed out money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers for Christ sakes.

I think the West was on the right track. Naturally the road is rocky, mistakes happen and there might always be better ways to tackle the threat. Wishing to talk with them because "No, we are not winning" is not one of those.
Meeting over a coffee with him while only a fool would believe that his scientists are not busy building a nuclear bomb meanwhile, is not either.

1. There were no more attacks on the US during all that time.

Wow no attacks in a whole 8 years , errrrrr......how many years was it between the bombing of the World Trade Center and the next attack on the world Trade Center ?

2. The attacks on Madrid and London were EXACTLY designed to exploit the weakness of Western societies and make them vote for governments that would reduce the military threat against the enemy by withdrawing from the fight, and at least in Spain it worked.

Hold on , the Spanish vote was going to be very close anyway , as far as the population was concerned there was an overwhelming majority against involvement in Iraq from the start , the only real impact the Madrid bombings had on the election was the government supporters abandoning them when the government lied about the bombings and continued to lie even after the lies were thoroughtly exposed .
Plus of course Spain is still in Afghanistan , while Canada and Holland who didn't get bombed have said they are pulling out .
It appears your point doesn't fly very well .

Oh and ....

The US lost South-Vietnam because of the nuclear threat from the Soviet Union and because of the hippies back home.

too funny

[CaptainHaplo]

Ahh once again we get the "ridicule because I can't refute" arguement from le' tribesman on the Vietnam war...

Not suprising since he has done the same regarding historical proof of duplicity by muslims that I pointed out.

HeartC- a word of advice. Don't respond with intelligence or fact, it won't be understood....

Good points though - and your right BTW - the "home sentiment" has been why things have changed. That is how we as a people and government are setup, and while I don't necessarily agree with this, at least its being done in accordance within the constitutional road laid out by our founders - an election bringing a new leader.

Ahh once again we get the "ridicule because I can't refute"

Errrrr.....Haplo have you had any luck finding a ceasefire agreement signed by the two parties who needed to sign it for your claims to be true ?
Is the answer NO because the agreement you claim existed never existed

Don't respond with intelligence or fact,

Do you understand the meaning of the word "fact"?
Obviously not .

So America couldn't win vietnam because of hippies and Russians , no mention of the Chinese or Vietmanese , or the American government and military ....it was the hippies and russians that done it:rotfl:
Anyone with even half a brain would first consider the American pre-war studies of the situation in Indo-China before they made a silly claim about hippies and Russians , then they would look at the the situation as it developed in South Vietnam before they made a silly claim about hippies and Russians , then they would look at other foriegn involvements in indo-china and perhaps mention Rusisa among others as part of the geo-political situation , then they might add hippies as an irrelevant little foot note in the later stages when the war was already unwinnable .
But only a muppet would attempt to claim it was the Russians and hippies that done it as that is such a shallow thoughtless claim that doesn't even scratch the surface of the topic .

[heartc]

Oh, you surely will not object to the fact that the US military refrained from attacking certain key targets such as air defense networks and C3 networks, because they knew that Russian "advisors" were in place, where the killing of which might have lead to an escalation of the conflict beyond South-East Asia? And you surely will not object, that, because of that reality, Washington put strong limits on what the military could do and not do, thus crippling any sound military campaign against what would otherwise be a "military" that mostly lived on tactics build in the early AD centuries, or living from shooting form the trees and pitholes.
And you surely cannot object to the fact, that because of the prolongment of the conflict, which was brought about by exactly those POLITICAL limits in the face of potential nuclear escalation against the supportive nation which was the Soviet Untion, and whithin which those unhealthy limits were put on the US military which resulted in a lot of deaths of US soldiers, was the REASON of why the people of the US could no longer accept the war and pushed their politicians to get out of it.

Back then, they pulled out because they could not run an effective campaign without risking nuclear war. They ran a political - not a military - campaign, and that is what caused the high number of losses for them. And that again was why their people demanded them to pull out (well, in fact they made a peace treaty, but as soon as they were out, the North Vietnamese burned that piece of paper and went into South Vietnam). And that is why they lost.

Now, these days, we do not face the nuclear threat right now, which would stop us from fighting in an effective and earnest way against those stone-age minded ****ers. These days, all that stops us is pussies like those who are posting here every ****ing day, who deem themselves as superior intellectual beings by putting forward a bunch of "I'm so smart, if the world was me, there would only be peace" dumb****, who sabotage their own civilization in the fight against radical, uneducated and hatefull barbarians. Oh, and the radicals being radicals is not our fault, btw. Them being hatefull, racist, uneducated barbarians is their own choice. It's what their leaders build their power on. They have to change their leaders, and they have to change their idea of politics and of the individual. But it is NEVER OUR fault when they drive ****ing airplanes into OUR HOMES. THEY ALONE have to take the responsiblity of their stupid barbarism. And indeed they DO. They are ****ing PROUD of it. That is NOT our fault or problem. It is THEIRS.
All WE have to deal with is securing our safety by destroying their hostile leaders and systems if they cannot stop it themselves.

Many people nowadays in the West have high respect for those underdeveloped countries, run by dictators through fear and hatred. Well, that might seem great, in a way, because it shows how far we have come in terms of tollerance, intellectual freedom and analysis. But I think we make a mistake when in the process of granting respect to THEM, we give up all respect for OURSELVES, and what the grandfathers of at least SOME of us FOUGHT FOR.
If we start deeming ourselves as so SMART from the comfortable fireplace in our living room - which is not the battlefield we send our soldiers on to fight on, btw - and deem radical and barbaric murderers as "victims" of ourselves, then we are comitting what is nothing other than collective suicide and we in fact no longer DESERVE to exist against those ****ING BARBARIANS who got stuck in some pre-medival mindset.
Let them have us, if YOU are more busy with defending and rationalizing their SICK WAYS, instead of RALLYING for us and OUR SOLDIERS.
**** your defeatism. **** it.

Be aware that your enemy KNOWS NO DEFEATISM. And he really doesn't need a foreign propaganda ministry, or foreign agitators, because he knows that there are enough people in our own lines which take care of that.

[GoldenRivet]

absolutely right

I have had it with the white house we have seen so far this year.

they can, will and HAVE sold us all up the river

Oh, you surely will not object to the fact that the US military refrained from attacking certain key targets such as air defense networks and C3 networks, because they knew that Russian "advisors" were in place, where the killing of which might have lead to an escalation of the conflict beyond South-East Asia?

And still you miss it , its Asia so the Russain were a little side note , the amount of russian advisors was miniscule compared to the chinese presence . After the screw up in Korea America had learnt to not risk pissing the Chinese off too much .
Vietnm was a prime example of a country not following its own advice and fighting a stupid needless war for all the wrong reasons when they already knew it was futile , but hey if you want to blame the russians and the hippies for the American failure all you are doing is showing you have a very low level of understanding concerning that conflict .

**** your defeatism. **** it.

isn't that a quote from Lord Haw Haw in one of his last drunken rants from Berlin ?