The Real Reason Dems Backed Burris for the Senate

[Garfield1966]

Nah, Dapoes just wants to go in and take them over like we did Iraq. It's all about nation building/liberating/oil .... don't ya know.

 

[dapoes]

History was not one of your better subjects was it? It's rather obvious if you ask me.

As I said before Stalin is one of the biggest mass murderers in history. The Iranians are not even close to being the threat that he posed. Yet we still had to deal with him none the less. What exactly do you purpose? Pretend like they don't exist?

Try making a comparison that's relevant to our current time. You can't pretend that they don't exist, but at the same time you don't capitulate and be an apologist to them either. You have to take a hard line.

In our (relevant) present time, Iran:

Could really care less for what Obama has to say: Iranian protesters burn Barack Obama pictures
Sponsors Terrorism
Is Linked to Several Terrorist Organizations
Governs under Shariah Law
Vows Israel should be wiped off map
May Achieve Capability to Make A Nuclear Weapon in 2009 despite numerous UN and global outrage.

If you think all this is going "strengthen our relationship" with Iran, your dead wrong. Again.

 

[Garfield1966]

And your suggestion for a course of actions is ....?

 

[tech2101]

Try making a comparison that's relevant to our current time.

You post a picture of a guy who does not control Iran in any way...

 

[dapoes]

You post a picture of a guy who does not control Iran in any way...

Who Obamsa? well thats obvious aint it!

If you are talking about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Iran's president) then you are sadly mistaken once again.

 

[tech2101]

Who Obamsa? well thats obvious aint it!

If you are talking about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Iran's president) then you are sadly mistaken once again.

Hmmm...

In terms of constitutional authority, the ascetic Mr Khamenei is plainly the most powerful man in the Islamic Republic; no big decision can be taken without his consent. Some Western experts think he is more powerful now than at any time in his 19 years as leader. The most influential institutions in Iran’s elaborate power-structure, including the Revolutionary Guards, the Guardian Council, the presidency and parliament, are all still run by direct appointees of the supreme leader or by people unfailingly obsequious to him.

Good night.

Now go ahead and start three more anti-Obama threads and talk to me in the morning.

 

[dapoes]

Hmmm...



Good night.

Now go ahead and start three more anti-Obama threads and talk to me in the morning.

Thank you, I will do just that, any suggestions? There seems to be so many to choose from lately im finding it difficult to keep up.

 

[delldude]

Hmmm...



Good night.

Now go ahead and start three more anti-Obama threads and talk to me in the morning.

Tech...it all comes down to whose ear Ahmadinajihad has at any given moment.

 

[777 fixer]

Try making a comparison that's relevant to our current time. You can't pretend that they don't exist, but at the same time you don't capitulate and be an apologist to them either. You have to take a hard line.

In our (relevant) present time, Iran:

Could really care less for what Obama has to say: Iranian protesters burn Barack Obama pictures
Sponsors Terrorism
Is Linked to Several Terrorist Organizations
Governs under Shariah Law
Vows Israel should be wiped off map
May Achieve Capability to Make A Nuclear Weapon in 2009 despite numerous UN and global outrage.

If you think all this is going "strengthen our relationship" with Iran, your dead wrong. Again.

You know what they say about those who are ignorant of history. What has happened in the past is totally relevant to what's going on today. Care to dispute that?

However if you want to continue playing your little game I'll try to use something a little recent. All those Sunni tribes we struck deals with in Iraq were no saints. In fact they were the ones killing US servicemen. Yet we talked to them none the less.

 

[dapoes]

You know what they say about those who are ignorant of history. What has happened in the past is totally relevant to what's going on today. Care to dispute that?

And some are just plain ignorant to the world around them. So how is how is the relationship we had with Russia and Stalin in the past relevent to how we deal with terrorists in our modern times? What lessons can be applied that are relevent? There are none. Two different cultures, with different fundementals.

However if you want to continue playing your little game I'll try to use something a little recent. All those Sunni tribes we struck deals with in Iraq were no saints. In fact they were the ones killing US servicemen. Yet we talked to them none the less.

And logical answer is that we shouldnt have.

 

[777 fixer]

And some are just plain ignorant to the world around them. So how is how is the relationship we had with Russia and Stalin in the past relevent to how we deal with terrorists in our modern times? What lessons can be applied that are relevent? There are none. Two different cultures, with different fundementals.
And logical answer is that we shouldnt have.

Reading your comments its rather obvious that you are the one who is ignorant of the world. May I remind you Iran is a country, not a terrorist organization. And before you say they support terrorist groups let me remind you so did the USSR.

 

[777 fixer]

And logical answer is that we shouldnt have.

You don't read much do you? Here's a suggestion, stop listening to the Hannity's and Limbaugh's of the world and crack open a book. One book I would recommend is The Gamble by Tom Ricks. If you think the the troops surge is what defeated the Sunni insurgency in Iraq then you are sadly mistaken. Never in history has flooding a country with soldiers trained to fight a conventional war defeated an insurgency. It did not work for the US in Vietnam nor did it work for the Soviets in Afghnaistan.

What worked for the US in Iraq was to sit down with the various Sunni tribes and strick deals. What also helped was Al Queda trying to strong arm those tribes. That's becasue it back fired big time on them, all they did was drive those tribes deeper into the arms of the Americans. Don't think I'm telling the truth, just look at he casualty figures for this time frame. If we had not dealt with these Sunni tribes and just kept doing what we were doing the insurgency would still be going strong.

 

[777 fixer]

Who REALLY cares how the surge worked?

It's working and that is the bottom line.

People should care how and why it worked. As the saying goes those who are ignorant of history are condemened to reapeat it. There are people out there who are under the impression that the surge is what did it. However the truth is that if the US had just sent more troops and not changed tactics the only thing that would have been accomplished is to give the insurgents more targets. That's a very important histroical lesson to be learned in all this. Something that seems to be lost on people like dapoes.

 

[delldude]

People should care how and why it worked. As the saying goes those who are ignorant of history are condemened to reapeat it. There are people out there who are under the impression that the surge is what did it. However the truth is that if the US had just sent more troops and not changed tactics the only thing that would have been accomplished is to give the insurgents more targets. That's a very important histroical lesson to be learned in all this. Something that seems to be lost on people like dapoes.

War involves ever changing tactics to suit the Theatre du Jour...don't change tactics and its Dien Bien Phu.....all over again.

Above all that........the increase in troops and available intel let our guys target more strongholds with numerical superiority and not 'provide more targets' as you infer.

No spell check tonite trip seven?

 

[UAL_TECH]

-------------- Edited by Me -----------------------

OOPS