Vlad D Impeller
Commander
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,644
Re: Murtha is just wrong!
Yep! wet bread in a basket
Yep! wet bread in a basket
Is this the same military that Bush said in his first-term campaign was ill-equipped, under-funded, and poorly-trained? And then used it to invaded a country after he took office? Man, this is confusing. Which is it?
No need to be confused, Boatbuoy. You're 100% correct. It is precisely the same exact fighting machine that Clinton loathed and decimated in his eight-year role as it's chief commander.<br /><br />Over 100billion dolars later, and the damage Clinton had visited upon the US armed forces has yet to fully-recover. Granted, most of those monies are being spent in DEPLOYMENT. The only time clinton "deployed" them was in Samolia, and to bomb ibuprophen factories, in an effort to wag his dog!<br />But you're correct..The same force.And they have come a long way, man. And now, there is even a modicum of PRIDE on our brave,powerful side.
<br />I lived durring this time, and personally know what happened.<br />
Very deceptive. Yes, the budget was increased because the previous budget (which incidentally included the "first gulf war" costs) ,was drastically cut by Bush in the last months of his term, along with the closures of non-essential military bases and logistical support of an army that was no longer in need of such logistical expenditures.<br /><br />And yet, even then, the money spent durring that war caused quite a flood of tears amoung the lefties. you cannot have it both ways. Decide on a position, and let's debate it.<br />Bush did indeed, cave to this pressure (imho). But your premise that clinton INCREASED spending,is weighed-against that, and the armed forces were decimated INSPITE of an "increase in spending". This is a matter of historic record. So we can agree to disagree, or not.<br /> Here is a nicely-parsed left-winger's figures,which are tecnically correct, showing both sides of this argument. It teaches you how to play "fudge the numbers",to support either of us. My point by all of this is, just keep believing in the myth if you want.<br />After all, my own mind has been made-up thru living in those times,and the four presidents before them. I know what they did, and have served under the budget axe/fruit basket in person. I do not need parsing to know what happened.<br /><br />As per your request, i checked my facts.And so far, history has not been rewritten yet.<br />But keep trying. It is good to point-out the efforts taken. I'll admit you are correct (sort of)..Yes, George H. W. Bush went in there to hand out sandwiches, in a food and medical supply airlift -- "humanitarian aid"...Gee. I didn't think us cold-hearted right-wingers were capable of that
...<br />And then ,when Aidid's mutants HIJACKED the convoys, Bill Clinton turned the mission into a police action to catch the Somali warlord Mohammed Aidid - and ordered our guys to do it in broad daylight, not when they could gain tactical advantage of any kind. They were not even trained for this kind of thing except under the cloak of moonless darness! In other words, Bush "deployed" an airlift of FOOD. Clinton deloyed a failed police-action without support.<br />Add clinton to the growing list of morons in i refer to in this thread please.<br /> <br />Clinton "DEPLOYED" an aircraft carrier task force, and a helicopter to get a tyrant...But wanted it done by one choopper with zero support. Don't ask me why, and know this: I do not CARE why.. When they tried to gain permission to extradite the crew, they were simply denied mission approveal by then-CIC, bill clinton!<br />He loved the United States military, didn't he?<br />Read the book by those who were there -- that is, if you REALLY want the facts.Ask those who served under his budget (i did not btw).<br /><br />You'll learn why the Clinton administration denied the requested support," which, by the way, was denied because "we didn't want to appear racist".
<br />Thanks for the link, Rodbolt, and i actually bookmarked it for future reference. It's dead-on, as i recall the series of events.<br /><br />I'll never forget that either, Rodbolt. I was in shock myself, watching the made-for-tv circus from my easy chair. I have never seen, nor do i EVER want to see our nilitary used in such a way again!<br />
Well, our recalections may be different as far as what we remember and fail to. But the tactics of cutting and ruinning that clinton used are indicativbe of his use and his very relationship with the forces he commanded.<br />He did the wrong thing, imho, Rodbolt. He should've finished the job period.<br />My opinion is, any time they are used as the world's policemen, they are being missused.<br />Any time they are used for humanitarian chores, such as in the Bosnia blunder, they are being missused.<br /><br />As Rush Limbaugh is always saying,"The purpose of the military is to kill people and break things". He is correct.<br /><br /><br />I find it necesscary to repeat myself from former post above:<br /><br />"Bush did indeed, cave to this pressure (imho). But your premise that clinton INCREASED spending,is weighed-against that, and the armed forces were decimated INSPITE of an "increase in spending". This is a matter of historic record. So we can agree to disagree, or not."<br /><br />But back to topic as it related to our discussion on the use of military and myrtha's idea to cut and run like clinton did in Bosnia;<br />You do realize, that coalition forces ARE currently winding-down? Their are no B2 sorties over Bagdhad these days. There is little need for CAS in a land allready liberated, Rodbolt. Ask yourself a couple of questions;<br />"Why does murtha advocate withdrawl now, as opposed to at the beginning of the conflict?<br />He was "gung-ho" durring the initial attacks. What changed his mind?<br />Will his current campaign change regarding troop disposition in the waining days of this victory?<br />Is he truely concerned for "the safety of our troops" (i still laugh as i type that Kerry quote), or is he counting upon the inevitable, and calling it "MY IDEA"?<br />Just a few possiblities. I'm going to be listening for him or his mafia to utter the following sentence many times leading-up to the 2008 elections....<br /><br />"It's a good thing Bush decided to heed our advice, and pull-out when he did".
Those democrats would have nothing but contempt for the democrats of today and would denounce and reject categorically ALL the BS and political posturing of which they are so clearly guilty.<br /><br />Never has it been so clear that the democrats of today would sell this country down the river just to regain their former status. If they would abandon the far left and leave them to form up as the communist or socialist party, they might have a chance, but the radicals are driving that train and have thrown off all those with a modicum of integrity ---with the exception of a few like Joe Lieberman. Pathetic.<br /><br />*glub, glub*
<br />Exactly. And you would think that they would have sided with the country they claimed to be a part of. <br />And they cannot, with a clear conscience, even begin to recite the 'Pledge of Allegiance' ---and if they did, they would stop just short of uttering "under God, indevissable"!<br /><br />
<br />Not without one hell of a fight.<br />
You have been given the reasons many times. You lived durring the period of delay tactics waged by the UN, you have seen the towers fall. You whitnessed the pictures of dead kurds gassed by Sadamn. You have seen the US coalition forces uncover his torture chambers and prisons --- only to accuse US of widespread war crimes when we used those facilities as our OWN prison holes!<br />What is the point of belaboring this, outside of defending a madman who defends the regime of a madman? I'm already aware of you investment in our defeat, thru your defense of murtha/Kerry et al (jazeeeerah).<br />But what drives you as a so-called "American" to do this? <br />Why do you despise your own country so?<br />Why not just plunge headlong into the realm of the enemy, and take-up residense there? They could use a few more covert operatives over there. Here, you are just one of thousands of disenfranchised losers, filled with hatered and rage for America's leader, to such an extent, as to turn-coat on your country's military objectives, thus serving one side only. And we both know which side that is.<br />Even tho these questions appear to be diected soley towards you, i am not NOT trying to make this "about you",PW. Your post was just timely and convenient.I'm just trying to understand the mindset that supports murtha.
Well, now, I guess that settles it. Rodbolt said it, and he was an E-5, so it must be true.<br /><br />I know a bunch of Guardsmen who'd love to take you to the woodshed, rodbolt. They would not be near as polite in their response as I am being.
