PDA

View Full Version : Another Bush initiative...your tax dollars at work..



MDFINFAN
07-27-2004, 05:41 PM
Man ol Man...

Bigger breasts offered as perk to US soldiers (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200407/s1159361.htm)

yep, keep giving those tax breaks to the rich, and spend what's left like this..

I can't wait to read your responses.

iceblizzard69
07-27-2004, 05:44 PM
I can guarantee that a Bush supporter will say that this isn't true because the link is from a foreign web site.

This is one of the reasons why I don't like Bush. I'm not against the tax cuts (I lean more to the right than to the left on economic issues) but Bush spends money horribly, and this is a perfect example of it.

MDFINFAN
07-27-2004, 05:49 PM
I can guarantee that a Bush supporter will say that this isn't true because the link is from a foreign web site.

This is one of the reasons why I don't like Bush. I'm not against the tax cuts (I lean more to the right than to the left on economic issues) but Bush spends money horribly, and this is a perfect example of it.

The only problem with a tax break is the middle and lower class gets very little...I'm not against tax breaks, only who gets it. if it would go to the middle and lower class, they would spend us out of the reccession. But there's not enough rich people to do that. They shelter the money and try to get richer..so in essence we take money from the middle and lower class people who will have to pay this bill, like it or not, it will come to haunt those class of people, because it's going to be too big of bill even for the top 1% to pay by themselves.

Section126
07-27-2004, 06:11 PM
Congress funds the military...not the President..........Do you even know how our government works?

MDFINFAN
07-27-2004, 06:22 PM
Congress funds the military...not the President..........Do you even know how our government works?

do you remember something called the state of the union address..and who sets up the budget and direction it should take..my how quickly we forgot little things like that.. :D

PhinPhan1227
07-27-2004, 07:29 PM
do you remember something called the state of the union address..and who sets up the budget and direction it should take..my how quickly we forgot little things like that.. :D


For someone who "knows things" you're certainly clueless about the military. Military docs perform MANY elective surgeries. And good luck to you if you take them up on them. In a nutshell, these guys are practicing on live soldiers and their families. If you're a plastic surgeon whose ACTUAL job is stitching slodiers faces back together after being torn up from shrapnel, how do you practice when you don't HAVE any soldiers whose faces are torn up by shrapnel? The military was doing this stuff LONG before Bush came on the scene. Or didn't Deepthroat fill you in on THOSE facts?

Section126
07-27-2004, 07:52 PM
do you remember something called the state of the union address..and who sets up the budget and direction it should take..my how quickly we forgot little things like that.. :D


I don't remember Bush saying that he was giving away free boob jobs in the SOTU speech......

You are just lost......

Congress controls the purse strings...get that through your head.

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 03:58 AM
For someone who "knows things" you're certainly clueless about the military. Military docs perform MANY elective surgeries. And good luck to you if you take them up on them. In a nutshell, these guys are practicing on live soldiers and their families. If you're a plastic surgeon whose ACTUAL job is stitching slodiers faces back together after being torn up from shrapnel, how do you practice when you don't HAVE any soldiers whose faces are torn up by shrapnel? The military was doing this stuff LONG before Bush came on the scene. Or didn't Deepthroat fill you in on THOSE facts?

Have you been in the Military? I don't go down party lines, I voted for Regan and Clinton...

The reason I do what I think is right is because I see how being in party taints the thought pattern of people and I see in you and Section..you guys don't think for yourself, you use the party line type answers, so I don't know if I'm talking to people with clear independent thought or people who only listen to Republician rectoric and resight them. Take a moment to sit back and tell me one thing you think this president has done wrong..just one. and I ask do you think he's a good speaker, in the sense that he can pronounce words, have you ever seem him mispronounce words ?? I just want to hear from ya'll, not the party..btw, the Defense wasn't doing that stuff lone before Bush, they were going to hospitals and doing trauma type stuff to keep up with those type of skills...it would seem since the Gulf war and now this one...the stuff in this article wouldn't be neccessary since we have plenty of troops with missing parts and disformaties to practice on. You know the ones that your government don't like to show you guys, come up here to DC and I'll carry you by Walter Reed Hospital...You may understand my lack of understanding about why we're doing what this article is saying we're doing.

PhinPhan1227
07-29-2004, 09:50 AM
Have you been in the Military? I don't go down party lines, I voted for Regan and Clinton...

The reason I do what I think is right is because I see how being in party taints the thought pattern of people and I see in you and Section..you guys don't think for yourself, you use the party line type answers, so I don't know if I'm talking to people with clear independent thought or people who only listen to Republician rectoric and resight them. Take a moment to sit back and tell me one thing you think this president has done wrong..just one. and I ask do you think he's a good speaker, in the sense that he can pronounce words, have you ever seem him mispronounce words ?? I just want to hear from ya'll, not the party..btw, the Defense wasn't doing that stuff lone before Bush, they were going to hospitals and doing trauma type stuff to keep up with those type of skills...it would seem since the Gulf war and now this one...the stuff in this article wouldn't be neccessary since we have plenty of troops with missing parts and disformaties to practice on. You know the ones that your government don't like to show you guys, come up here to DC and I'll carry you by Walter Reed Hospital...You may understand my lack of understanding about why we're doing what this article is saying we're doing.


10th Mountain Light Infantry, 11H. Also served in the CT NAtional Guard. And I'm a registered Independant. What has Bush done wrong? Heck, here's a list just off the top of my head...

-The tax cuts were a BIT too broad. Great as a whole, but a BIT too broad.
-Justified the war on WMD's when there were MUCH better reasons.
-Should have left Gay Marriage up to the states and the courts.
-Shouldn't have left his moderate policies behind just to win the support of the far Right.
-Prescription drug initiative sucks a$$.

As for Bush public speaking...who cares? Clinton was a GREAT speaker, who didn't DO anything. Other than cut our military in half and then turn around and deploy it more than Bush, Reagan and Carter combined that is. So forgive me, but I'll take a "do'er" over a talker ANY day of the week.

ltfinfan
07-29-2004, 10:53 AM
10th Mountain Light Infantry, 11H. Also served in the CT NAtional Guard. And I'm a registered Independant. What has Bush done wrong? Heck, here's a list just off the top of my head...

-The tax cuts were a BIT too broad. Great as a whole, but a BIT too broad.
-Justified the war on WMD's when there were MUCH better reasons.
-Should have left Gay Marriage up to the states and the courts.
-Shouldn't have left his moderate policies behind just to win the support of the far Right.
-Prescription drug initiative sucks a$$.

As for Bush public speaking...who cares? Clinton was a GREAT speaker, who didn't DO anything. Other than cut our military in half and then turn around and deploy it more than Bush, Reagan and Carter combined that is. So forgive me, but I'll take a "do'er" over a talker ANY day of the week.




:0wned:

caneproud117
07-29-2004, 11:03 AM
10th Mountain Light Infantry, 11H. Also served in the CT NAtional Guard. And I'm a registered Independant. What has Bush done wrong? Heck, here's a list just off the top of my head...

-The tax cuts were a BIT too broad. Great as a whole, but a BIT too broad.
-Justified the war on WMD's when there were MUCH better reasons.
-Should have left Gay Marriage up to the states and the courts.
-Shouldn't have left his moderate policies behind just to win the support of the far Right.
-Prescription drug initiative sucks a$$.

As for Bush public speaking...who cares? Clinton was a GREAT speaker, who didn't DO anything. Other than cut our military in half and then turn around and deploy it more than Bush, Reagan and Carter combined that is. So forgive me, but I'll take a "do'er" over a talker ANY day of the week.

Add to that cutting some funding to the no child left behind policy and the Foreign Policy (or lack thereof). He also HAD to justify the war on WMD otherwise the American people wouldn't have gone to war. Here's a tongue twister for you. Does a do'er really know what he's do'ing if he can't say what he's thinking? Hey PhinPhan which policies has he done particually well?

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 12:41 PM
10th Mountain Light Infantry, 11H. Also served in the CT NAtional Guard. And I'm a registered Independant. What has Bush done wrong? Heck, here's a list just off the top of my head...

-The tax cuts were a BIT too broad. Great as a whole, but a BIT too broad.
-Justified the war on WMD's when there were MUCH better reasons.
-Should have left Gay Marriage up to the states and the courts.
-Shouldn't have left his moderate policies behind just to win the support of the far Right.
-Prescription drug initiative sucks a$$.

As for Bush public speaking...who cares? Clinton was a GREAT speaker, who didn't DO anything. Other than cut our military in half and then turn around and deploy it more than Bush, Reagan and Carter combined that is. So forgive me, but I'll take a "do'er" over a talker ANY day of the week.

I don't know how long you've been in the guards, but I was in the regular Army, I got out right when Clinton was taking office the 1st time, I got out on something call VSI, the Military was being down sized and incentives were given for people to volunteer out. I volunteered out. This was before Clinton took office...so KNOW, it wasn't clinton who cut the military, that started in Bush's #1 terms..PEOPLE ALWAYS GET THAT WRONG. Clinton fix the tax base and cuts appropriately and the economy thrieved..no questions about that. His clean air act actually saved a lot of vital resources for this country..we do need trees to help produce air for us. People take for granted we have a unlimited supply..We must take take of this earth in order to survive. I'm not a save the rain forrest type person, but I do understand how life works..and we need our natural resources for that. I'm glad you pointed out that Clinton DID DEPLOY OUR MILITARY, most people keep thinking that Dem's won't use our Military..Thanks, I'm a Independent and I got it right by voting for Clinton, thinking he would continue to protect our interest, even if it involved using our Military. I CARE about bush speaking..
He represent all of us when he speaks to other nations..and he's not the kind of person I want speaking for us..I have a hard time understanding him and I'm an American, I can hear the snickers from others..Since when is intelligence not important in a president..I can't really say this guy is smart..

BigFinFan
07-29-2004, 01:15 PM
The Military also offers Breast reduction - this has been done since the early ninties.

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 01:20 PM
The Military also offers Breast reduction - this has been done since the early ninties.

Link or credible info source showing this to be true..if it's just a statement forgot it..repub's will say anything..I need to see proof..I show you the article, now show me a rebuttal from some credible source, please no right wing sites.. :D :shakeno:

BigFinFan
07-29-2004, 01:26 PM
Let me get in contact with the female that worked for me in 1991 that actaully had the surgery.

IRT your link, I searched the New Yorker Magazine, but I was unable to loacte the article. All you posted was a link that referenced the article.

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 01:27 PM
Let me get in contact with the female that worked for me in 1991 that actaully had the surgery.

IRT your link, I searched the New Yorker Magazine, but I was unable to loacte the article. All you posted was a link that referenced the article.

I posted something :D

BigFinFan
07-29-2004, 01:29 PM
I do not have pictures to show you, but I know for fact that it was done. I also had a female who had hemmoroids, and the Navy did surgery on her too!

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 01:33 PM
I do not have pictures to show you, but I know for fact that it was done. I also had a female who had hemmoroids, and the Navy did surgery on her too!

Prove it, and give us the full story of why it was done, not just a piece to support your claims.. :shakeno:

BigFinFan
07-29-2004, 01:34 PM
Prove what? That breast reductions, hemmoriod removal, and other surgeries have been done by military doctors prior to this report by you?

MDFINFAN
07-29-2004, 01:37 PM
Prove what? That breast reductions, hemmoriod removal, and other surgeries have been done by military doctors prior to this report by you?

Breast reductions, I thought you were referring to the article..breast reductions are usually done for health purposes..

PhinPhan1227
07-29-2004, 03:53 PM
I don't know how long you've been in the guards, but I was in the regular Army, I got out right when Clinton was taking office the 1st time, I got out on something call VSI, the Military was being down sized and incentives were given for people to volunteer out. I volunteered out. This was before Clinton took office...so KNOW, it wasn't clinton who cut the military, that started in Bush's #1 terms..PEOPLE ALWAYS GET THAT WRONG. Clinton fix the tax base and cuts appropriately and the economy thrieved..no questions about that. His clean air act actually saved a lot of vital resources for this country..we do need trees to help produce air for us. People take for granted we have a unlimited supply..We must take take of this earth in order to survive. I'm not a save the rain forrest type person, but I do understand how life works..and we need our natural resources for that. I'm glad you pointed out that Clinton DID DEPLOY OUR MILITARY, most people keep thinking that Dem's won't use our Military..Thanks, I'm a Independent and I got it right by voting for Clinton, thinking he would continue to protect our interest, even if it involved using our Military. I CARE about bush speaking..
He represent all of us when he speaks to other nations..and he's not the kind of person I want speaking for us..I have a hard time understanding him and I'm an American, I can hear the snickers from others..Since when is intelligence not important in a president..I can't really say this guy is smart..


Excuse me, during CLINTONS TERM, the Army lost 60% of it's Divisions. Not before, not after, DURING. I served 3 years in the Army and 4 in the Guard. My Guard service ended in '99. So, what was your MOS? Where did you serve? As for Bush, he didn't CUT funding for NCLB...He INITIATED NCLB!! He increased education spending FORTY PERCENT over Clinton. What kind of bass ackwards logic equates a 40% increase into a CUT? And there were MUCH better reasons for going into Iraq. Like the fact that the sanctions that kept Saddam in check were strangling the Iraqi people. It wasn't a scenario which could go on forever. As for which policies he did well...

-Standardized testing requirements/standards for students AND teachers.
-Tax cuts
-Removal of the Taliban
-Removal of Saddam
-Middle East Road map for peace

None of those efforts have been perfect(actually Afghanistan was done as well as it could have been), but at least he did something.

Lastly, yes Clinton DID deploy the military he butchered. but only when it was COMPLETELY politically safe. The only limb he ever went out on was the one he stuck in Monica.

caneproud117
07-29-2004, 04:29 PM
Excuse me, during CLINTONS TERM, the Army lost 60% of it's Divisions. Not before, not after, DURING. I served 3 years in the Army and 4 in the Guard. My Guard service ended in '99. So, what was your MOS? Where did you serve? As for Bush, he didn't CUT funding for NCLB...He INITIATED NCLB!! He increased education spending FORTY PERCENT over Clinton. What kind of bass ackwards logic equates a 40% increase into a CUT? And there were MUCH better reasons for going into Iraq. Like the fact that the sanctions that kept Saddam in check were strangling the Iraqi people. It wasn't a scenario which could go on forever. As for which policies he did well...

-Standardized testing requirements/standards for students AND teachers.
-Tax cuts
-Removal of the Taliban
-Removal of Saddam
-Middle East Road map for peace

None of those efforts have been perfect(actually Afghanistan was done as well as it could have been), but at least he did something.

Lastly, yes Clinton DID deploy the military he butchered. but only when it was COMPLETELY politically safe. The only limb he ever went out on was the one he stuck in Monica.

Afghanistan was done as well as it could have been? Ha :roflmao:
You do still realize the man in charge of Afghanistan is still at large and the the Taliban are still helping to fight us in Iraq. Yeah right! All the troups that are in Iraq should be in Afghanistan finding the mastermind behind the worst event in U.S. history not starting something else before we finish what we started in Afghanistan.

PhinPhan1227
07-29-2004, 04:49 PM
Afghanistan was done as well as it could have been? Ha :roflmao:
You do still realize the man in charge of Afghanistan is still at large and the the Taliban are still helping to fight us in Iraq. Yeah right! All the troups that are in Iraq should be in Afghanistan finding the mastermind behind the worst event in U.S. history not starting something else before we finish what we started in Afghanistan.


Way to avoid my question. If you DID serve in the military you must have been a cook...based at Levinwroth most likely. Afghanistan is one of the most difficult spots on the planet to fight a war...unless you're a guerilla. Do you think it was because of incompitance that the Soviets lost the war there? It's a freaking mountain range!! You want to send our armored divisions there? To do what, polish the tank treads? Ever see an M1 Abrams climb a mountain? No, you haven't, because it can't be done. The troops we need and needed in Afghanistan are IN Afghanistan. That's our Special Forces units, them and 10th Mountain. BTW, Osama didn't mastermind 9/11...we already got the guy that did that. Not only are you clueless about the military, you aren't up on current events either.

iceblizzard69
07-29-2004, 05:56 PM
-The tax cuts were a BIT too broad. Great as a whole, but a BIT too broad.

I am not against the tax cuts although I would have liked to see more of them go to middle and lower class people. However, you can't cut taxes and then spend a ton of money. He taxes like a conservative and spends like a liberal and that simply doesn't work. The national debt is growing even more because of this. If you cut taxes, you have to cut spending.


-Justified the war on WMD's when there were MUCH better reasons.

I totally agree with you here. I was not against the war on Iraq, but his reasons for it were pretty bad.


-Should have left Gay Marriage up to the states and the courts.

This is one of the reasons I don't like him. He tried to limit the civil rights of a group of people in the Constitution which I think is absolutely wrong. However, I think we should let each state decide if they want Gay Marriage or not.


-Shouldn't have left his moderate policies behind just to win the support of the far Right.

This is absolutely HUGE! I thought Bush was better than Gore in 2000 (I didn't think he was good though, but the lesser of two evils) because I didn't think he was as right wing as he has proven to be. I thought this would be a moderate administration, but instead it only caters to the far right. This is the main reason why I think he needs to go. He has just been way too far right wing as president.


-Prescription drug initiative sucks a$$.



True. I think you underrate what he has done wrong as President. The things you listed are huge and are great reasons why to not vote for him. He spends too much considering the amount he taxes and all of his policies cater towards the far right. I am not anti-Republican, I would have voted for my current governor who is a Republican and Guiliani was a great Republican mayor here in NYC (but he was originially a Democrat...), but I don't like people who are too far to one side, and IMO, Bush is too far to the right for me to support his re-election.

finfan54
07-30-2004, 09:38 AM
The only problem with a tax break is the middle and lower class gets very little...I'm not against tax breaks, only who gets it. if it would go to the middle and lower class, they would spend us out of the reccession. But there's not enough rich people to do that. They shelter the money and try to get richer..so in essence we take money from the middle and lower class people who will have to pay this bill, like it or not, it will come to haunt those class of people, because it's going to be too big of bill even for the top 1% to pay by themselves.


As a married man of 11 years and with a 6 year old duaghter and the one who does the taxes, i can say that the Bush Tax cut is more than just the $600 i recieved. first off, the 600 is not a one time thing, it continues year after year. those who say "what am i going to do with 600?" I say give it to me if you dont want it! i can put it to good use! But the Bush Tax cut is accelerating in the coming years and that is what John Kerry is really going to stop. My tax refund check has grown these past few years from about 800- now 1200 this year. This refund has enabled me to stay alive during summer months while my wife, a teacher, takes summers off. I just got downsized from Kodak and am currently attending school full time to get my bachelors in Accounting (Auditing) so that i can get a job that pays twice what i was making before. Those unemployment rules that allow me to do this came from GW Bush!
The marriage penalty tax that Clinton loved so dearly was done away with and rightly so which gives us more than just the 600/year. The Bush tax cut makes it so businesses can invest better so that jobs can be created which is what is happening now after a long drwan out spell of 911 and accounting scandals and recession that GW inherited. TheBush tax cut enabled me to stay afloat and get by while in a lot of debt while i go to school to better myself and society.

PhinPhan1227
07-30-2004, 10:53 AM
I am not against the tax cuts although I would have liked to see more of them go to middle and lower class people. However, you can't cut taxes and then spend a ton of money. He taxes like a conservative and spends like a liberal and that simply doesn't work. The national debt is growing even more because of this. If you cut taxes, you have to cut spending.



I totally agree with you here. I was not against the war on Iraq, but his reasons for it were pretty bad.



This is one of the reasons I don't like him. He tried to limit the civil rights of a group of people in the Constitution which I think is absolutely wrong. However, I think we should let each state decide if they want Gay Marriage or not.



This is absolutely HUGE! I thought Bush was better than Gore in 2000 (I didn't think he was good though, but the lesser of two evils) because I didn't think he was as right wing as he has proven to be. I thought this would be a moderate administration, but instead it only caters to the far right. This is the main reason why I think he needs to go. He has just been way too far right wing as president.



True. I think you underrate what he has done wrong as President. The things you listed are huge and are great reasons why to not vote for him. He spends too much considering the amount he taxes and all of his policies cater towards the far right. I am not anti-Republican, I would have voted for my current governor who is a Republican and Guiliani was a great Republican mayor here in NYC (but he was originially a Democrat...), but I don't like people who are too far to one side, and IMO, Bush is too far to the right for me to support his re-election.


Problem is, while I believe Bush has made PLENTY of mistakes, at least he has ACTED. I'm sure Kerry won't make many mistakes....because Kerry won't do anything which might be screwed up...he just won't do ANYTHING. His entire career consists of doing nothing. And call me crazy, I'd like a President to actually "lead". Also, I believe that once Bush has won reelection he won't need to worry about his right wing base anymore and can move back towards the middle.

caneproud117
07-30-2004, 11:54 AM
Way to avoid my question. If you DID serve in the military you must have been a cook...based at Levinwroth most likely. Afghanistan is one of the most difficult spots on the planet to fight a war...unless you're a guerilla. Do you think it was because of incompitance that the Soviets lost the war there? It's a freaking mountain range!! You want to send our armored divisions there? To do what, polish the tank treads? Ever see an M1 Abrams climb a mountain? No, you haven't, because it can't be done. The troops we need and needed in Afghanistan are IN Afghanistan. That's our Special Forces units, them and 10th Mountain. BTW, Osama didn't mastermind 9/11...we already got the guy that did that. Not only are you clueless about the military, you aren't up on current events either.

You did not ask a question in your last post, therefore I cannot answer the 'question'. OBL is the mastermind behind the attacks that are still going on today. If we had not started a war in Iraq we would have found him by now. I mean the guy's close to 7 feet tall and on dialysis. How's he getting his blood? I suggest sending all the ground troups that we would have sent to Iraq to Afghanistan to find the guy responsible for the guerilla attacks. I never claimed to have been in the military, you're thinking of MDFan or something like that. Also you forgot to put a time table on this so called Sadaam taking over 75% of the oil supply, think that would have taken a year? two years even? Heck no! With that army of his that would have taken him at least 7-10 years. Plus, don't you think that even if he was going to take over Sudan we would have stopped him then? Your hypothetical theory has a lot of flaws.

PhinPhan1227
07-30-2004, 12:15 PM
You did not ask a question in your last post, therefore I cannot answer the 'question'. OBL is the mastermind behind the attacks that are still going on today. If we had not started a war in Iraq we would have found him by now. I mean the guy's close to 7 feet tall and on dialysis. How's he getting his blood? I suggest sending all the ground troups that we would have sent to Iraq to Afghanistan to find the guy responsible for the guerilla attacks. I never claimed to have been in the military, you're thinking of MDFan or something like that. Also you forgot to put a time table on this so called Sadaam taking over 75% of the oil supply, think that would have taken a year? two years even? Heck no! With that army of his that would have taken him at least 7-10 years. Plus, don't you think that even if he was going to take over Sudan we would have stopped him then? Your hypothetical theory has a lot of flaws.

Sorry, the question was directed at someone else. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is the man who masterminded 9/11. He planned the entire operation. That is well established fact. Osama is the front man, the popular face, but it was Mohammed who planned it and is thus "the mastermind" of 9/11. Now, here's a quick lesson in military operations...Our military, although it has been changed greatly since the end of the Cold War is STILL geared to fighting large land battles. Armored Divisions are our core units. Armored divisions are useful for fighting large battles and holding down large territories in the proper terrain. Now, Afghanistan is one big mountain range. Ever see a tank try to climb a mountain? How about an AFV? On the other hand, ever see what a single guy with an RPG can do to a 15 million dollar tank when he pops up behind it from a cave? Most of our military is worse than useless in Afgahnistan. It's just NOT suited for that type of terrain or combat. Why do you think the Soviets lost there? Same thing in Chechnya...same terrain, same type of combat, same results so far. We have ALL our Special Forces units there, as well as 10th Mountain Light Infantry. THOSE are the troops who work there. THOSE are the troops who are needed there. So in a sense, ALL of our troops ARE in Afghanistan, because ALL the troops who SHOULD be there, ARE there. As for Saddam, yes, it would have taken him about a decade to rebuild his military. Once he did so he could have swept down the Arabian Penninsula in roughly a month. Here's another military lesson...a good commander attacks the enemy when he is weak. He doesn't GIVE him the chance to get strong again.

caneproud117
07-30-2004, 12:23 PM
Sorry, the question was directed at someone else. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is the man who masterminded 9/11. He planned the entire operation. That is well established fact. Osama is the front man, the popular face, but it was Mohammed who planned it and is thus "the mastermind" of 9/11. Now, here's a quick lesson in military operations...Our military, although it has been changed greatly since the end of the Cold War is STILL geared to fighting large land battles. Armored Divisions are our core units. Armored divisions are useful for fighting large battles and holding down large territories in the proper terrain. Now, Afghanistan is one big mountain range. Ever see a tank try to climb a mountain? How about an AFV? On the other hand, ever see what a single guy with an RPG can do to a 15 million dollar tank when he pops up behind it from a cave? Most of our military is worse than useless in Afgahnistan. It's just NOT suited for that type of terrain or combat. Why do you think the Soviets lost there? Same thing in Chechnya...same terrain, same type of combat, same results so far. We have ALL our Special Forces units there, as well as 10th Mountain Light Infantry. THOSE are the troops who work there. THOSE are the troops who are needed there. So in a sense, ALL of our troops ARE in Afghanistan, because ALL the troops who SHOULD be there, ARE there. As for Saddam, yes, it would have taken him about a decade to rebuild his military. Once he did so he could have swept down the Arabian Penninsula in roughly a month. Here's another military lesson...a good commander attacks the enemy when he is weak. He doesn't GIVE him the chance to get strong again.

But by then by your previous estimation it would have taken us 10 years to drastically reduce our dependance on oil. See where I'm going here. By that time, taking over the Arabian Penninsula would have mean little to Sadaam if we weren't so dependant on oil. So you're saying infantry carrying rifles and grenades can't climb dirt mountains? Rendering any of our footpatrol useless, I highly doubt that considering that's how the guerillas get around.

PhinPhan1227
07-30-2004, 12:40 PM
But by then by your previous estimation it would have taken us 10 years to drastically reduce our dependance on oil. See where I'm going here. By that time, taking over the Arabian Penninsula would have mean little to Sadaam if we weren't so dependant on oil. So you're saying infantry carrying rifles and grenades can't climb dirt mountains? Rendering any of our footpatrol useless, I highly doubt that considering that's how the guerillas get around.


Sure, we could probably drastically reduce our oil dependance in 10 years. We could, but we won't. Bill Clinton was in office for 8 years, during that time the SUV BLOSSOMED into the vehicle of choice for the American people. If Clinton couldn't do it who will? So if Saddam was allowed to rearm(which he would have), by the time he's ready, we are still sucking gas. Now, as for the military, Yes, a soldier can slog up a mountain pass. But our mechanized infantry troops aren't trained to operate that way. They are trained to be transported to the battle by their Bradleys, they are supported by artillery and other heavy vehicles carrying their supplies. They are designed, equiped, and trained for a different kind of fighting than Afghanistan. Our Light Infantry(10th Mountain, Rangers, and other Spec OPs) are designed, equiped, and trained to fight in EXACTLY that kind of terrain. Look, if you really wanted to you could take a pilot and turn him into an Infantry soldier. But more than likely you will only get that pilot killed and whoever is next to him as well. It seems simple enough to a layman, but if you had actually served in the military, or even studied the military, you would know that we've got exactly what we need in Afghanistan.

caneproud117
07-30-2004, 01:11 PM
Sure, we could probably drastically reduce our oil dependance in 10 years. We could, but we won't. Bill Clinton was in office for 8 years, during that time the SUV BLOSSOMED into the vehicle of choice for the American people. If Clinton couldn't do it who will? So if Saddam was allowed to rearm(which he would have), by the time he's ready, we are still sucking gas. Now, as for the military, Yes, a soldier can slog up a mountain pass. But our mechanized infantry troops aren't trained to operate that way. They are trained to be transported to the battle by their Bradleys, they are supported by artillery and other heavy vehicles carrying their supplies. They are designed, equiped, and trained for a different kind of fighting than Afghanistan. Our Light Infantry(10th Mountain, Rangers, and other Spec OPs) are designed, equiped, and trained to fight in EXACTLY that kind of terrain. Look, if you really wanted to you could take a pilot and turn him into an Infantry soldier. But more than likely you will only get that pilot killed and whoever is next to him as well. It seems simple enough to a layman, but if you had actually served in the military, or even studied the military, you would know that we've got exactly what we need in Afghanistan.

You're comparison of a pilot to an infantry soldier is way off. These infantry soldiers are trained to fight on the ground not in the air. They're on the ground, they know how to use their weapon and to take and wield command. This is not some layman that has no skills on the ground. They may be "used" to backup from heavy machinery vehicles but that does not mean they don't know how to win a battle of guerilla warfare. It doesn't take much knowledge to hide and pick off terrorists one by one. If they play that game you play it, it's that simple. I don't care what you were trained to do, you do what's necessary to stay alive and keep killing the bad guy.

PhinPhan1227
07-30-2004, 02:46 PM
You're comparison of a pilot to an infantry soldier is way off. These infantry soldiers are trained to fight on the ground not in the air. They're on the ground, they know how to use their weapon and to take and wield command. This is not some layman that has no skills on the ground. They may be "used" to backup from heavy machinery vehicles but that does not mean they don't know how to win a battle of guerilla warfare. It doesn't take much knowledge to hide and pick off terrorists one by one. If they play that game you play it, it's that simple. I don't care what you were trained to do, you do what's necessary to stay alive and keep killing the bad guy.


Jesus Christ man I was IN The Infantry. For that matter I was IN the LIGHT Infantry. I know the difference between the training a Mech Inf soldier gets and the training the Light Inf gets. I know first hand the difference between the supply chain for the Mech Inf and the Light Inf. Do you know why we are the strongest Military on the planet? Technology is a big part but TRAINING is the biggest reason. We can afford more training than the other guy. But that training is not just in how to shoot straight. It's TACTICS. Throw a soldier into a situation that is completely outside his trainign and you get low morale, accidents, and high casualties. That's why soldiers make such bad cops in a "police action", it's not how they are trained. Throw guys into the mountains who have spent the last year training how to fight from a Bradley and you are going to get MUCH higher casualites than if you just stuck with the guys who are trained for that duty. Oh, and by "layman" I was referring to you, not a Mech Inf soldier. If a soldier HAS to he will do ANY job. But probably the second most defining aspect of a bad commander is one who misuses his soldiers. And sending our Mech Divisions into Afghanistan would be misusing those divisions. Dude, your knowledge of military matters is exactly ZERO. If you want to argue this point I suggest you educate yourself before doing so. At least read about the Russians efforts and mistakes first. The only troops that ever had ANY success for them in Afghanistan were their Spetznaz Spec Ops forces. Regular Army Units got run into the ground and chewed up by the guerrilla fighters in those mountains. BTW, go into an NCO club and make this statement loud enough for people to hear you..."It doesn't take much knowledge to hide and pick off terrorists one by one." You'll leave the buildig feet first.