• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Talk about a whiner.............

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
All the security experts and military ex-Generals testifying to Congress last week said that there are no military objectives left for the military to stay in Iraq for... Its up to Iraq now- all political-- and as long as we stay there- pour in taxpayer money to them- they will do nothing but take it...

KEY WORDS ex_generals I am sure they have all the intellignce necessary to base what they are saying on!!
just like you OT, with all your superior contacts and all the security briefings you have set in on!!!

Most all agreed- that we could be there for 50 years- but we will not prevent the inevitable- a civil/sectarian clash for power/war- that will probably end up with some Colonel or General of the Iraq Army in control of the government...

They also all agreed that when we pull out- we need to take everyone out except the Marine Unit that will be left to protect the Green Zone (and that could easily be re-enforced or defended)- as if we just leave smaller scattered units we are just asking for another Moghidishu...This needs to be done because every day we stay in with adequate forces the US military and our ability to defend the country and fight the war in Afghanistan denigrates- as the Army has completely used up (over utilized) all its manpower and resources....

As General McCaffrey said- "this war is over"- and the troops need to be brought home......

U.S. must leave Iraq, retired generals say

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Apr 4, 2008 12:45:38 EDT

Setting a withdrawal timetable from Iraq might be a shaky strategic move, but it would provide a morale boost for service members and their families, a former Army War College commandant said Wednesday.

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales Jr., testifying before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee about U.S. military strategy in Iraq, said he has no doubt that a major withdrawal of combat forces is coming because the U.S. has “run out of military options” and cannot indefinitely sustain troop levels.

“Regardless of who wins the election and regardless of conditions on the ground, by summer the troops will begin to come home,” said Scales, who headed the war college in 1997. “The only point of contention is how precipitous will be the withdrawal and whether the schedule of withdrawal should be a matter of administration policy.”

White House and Pentagon officials have resisted efforts by some lawmakers to set a fixed timetable for withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq, arguing that insurgents and other groups would try to use the dates to their advantage.

Scales, who was one of the creators of the Army After Next program in 1995 that helped plan for transforming the force, agreed that following a fixed withdrawal schedule “is not a good idea in an insurgency because the indigenous population tends to side with the perceived winners.”

In case you haven't noticed it is 2008.

“However, some publicly expressed window of withdrawal is necessary, for no other reason than to give soldier’s families some hope that their loved ones will not be stuck on a perpetual rollercoaster of deployments,” he said.

Scales testified along with two other retired Army generals, Gen. Barry McCaffrey and Lt. Gen. William Odom, who also agreed a withdrawal of U.S. combat troops early in the next president’s administration is inevitable.

“We face a deteriorating political situation with an over-extended Army,” said Odom, who served as director of the National Security Agency in the Reagan administration.

“The only sensible strategy is to withdraw rapidly but in good order,” Odom said. “Only that step can break the paralysis now gripping U.S. strategy in the region.”

McCaffrey, a former chief of U.S. Southern Command and commander of the 24th Infantry Division in the 1991 Gulf War, predicted a withdrawal of U.S. forces within three years or less because there is “no U.S. political will to continue” and because allies “have abandoned us.”

“It is over,” McCaffrey said.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/04/military_iraqwithdrawal_040208w/
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
As was testified to in those same hearings- all that the Bush/Cheney/Rummy/Wolfowitz crew kept was the military folks that agreed with their way of thought- anyone that questioned the war or tactics or objected to Rummy policy was GONE- the reason he appointed one of the most junior Generals to take over in Iraq after General Franks told Bush/Rummy and crew to "stick it"....And General Sanchez's reign was a disaster too...

Now we have "the" General Patraeus going to Congress to testify- the same day "insider sources" announce that he and Condi Rice are on the short list of V.P. possibilities of the candidate that is mirroring Bush policy and would think fighting for 100 years would be just fine with him....
Do you really think he will say anything that doesn't back Bush/McCain's neocon warmongering policy :???:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Do you really think he will say anything that doesn't back Bush/McCain's neocon warmongering policy

Yes, he is one to speak his mind and thoughts honestly.

His position as Multi-National Force Commander was confirmed by a Senate vote of 81-0 and is a dedicated soldier.

Didn't he buck the staus quo with the surge? :roll:

You sound as unpatriotic and as treasonous as the New York Times. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Do you really think he will say anything that doesn't back Bush/McCain's neocon warmongering policy

Yes, he is one to speak his mind and thoughts honestly.

His position as Multi-National Force Commander was confirmed by a Senate vote of 81-0 and is a dedicated soldier.

Didn't he buck the staus quo with the surge? :roll:

You sound as unpatriotic and as treasonous as the New York Times. :roll:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

If you've read any of Patraeus's writings or those of some that have served with him- you would know he has for a long time expressed his fervent desires to run for President- and again reasserted them to an aide just as lately as having received this current assignment...
Like any other motivated politician running for office, do you really think he would let a little thing like "the truth" stand between him and his chance to get what he's always wanted..... :???:
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Like any other motivated politician running for office, do you really think he would let a little thing like "the truth" stand between him and his chance to get what he's always wanted..... :???:
So you're saying one of our generals that has always been above reproach is a liar. You're a piece of work.
 

Steve

Well-known member
OldTimer
If you've read any of Patraeus's writings or those of some that have served with him- you would know he has for a long time expressed his fervent desires to run for President- and again reasserted them to an aide just as lately as having received this current assignment...

does it really matter if he wants a rank above General or if his strategy has worked where others failed..


The choice is clear... I would rather vote and support one general who's strategy has worked and is successful,... then a bunch of liberal politicians who's policy is surrender and failure...
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
would think fighting for 100 years would be just fine with him....

See you do it again, he did not say fighting for 100 years, he said have a presence there as long as no soldiers were being harmed or killed.

You are familiar with our bases in say Japan and North Korea? We are not there fighting, we have a presence there.

Quit being stupid and taking the low road, like the media does. You are no different than them. All it does is make people on here loose respect for you and then not take you serious on maybe an issue that you have something to offer.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
Like any other motivated politician running for office, do you really think he would let a little thing like "the truth" stand between him and his chance to get what he's always wanted..... :???:
So you're saying one of our generals that has always been above reproach is a liar. You're a piece of work.

Nope- just saying you have to look at anything he says with knowledge of the motives behind why he may be saying it and why he may have the opinions he has...

Unlike you Reverend- I don't care to blindly follow- especially when so many other knowledgeable individuals (former generals and administration staff) are now coming out with info to the contrary....
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Unlike you Reverend- I don't care to blindly follow-....
I always give an honorable man the benefit of the doubt till I know different. I'd think you'd do the same, especially when he's on our side in a war.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
Unlike you Reverend- I don't care to blindly follow-....
I always give an honorable man the benefit of the doubt till I know different. I'd think you'd do the same, especially when he's on our side in a war.

I did that with GW- and saw what he and his crew have done to the credibility of government and our country :roll: :( :mad: - which makes it tough anymore to not be skeptical about anyone he associates himself with or brings into his fold- especially when they have political motives that can influence their opinions....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
Unlike you Reverend- I don't care to blindly follow-....
I always give an honorable man the benefit of the doubt till I know different. I'd think you'd do the same, especially when he's on our side in a war.

I did that with GW- and saw what he and his crew have done to the credibility of government and our country :roll: :( :mad: - which makes it tough anymore to not be skeptical about anyone he associates himself with or brings into his fold- especially when they have political motives that can influence their opinions....

Grow up! What are you 12? You think George W Bush is the first politician to let someone down? You are such a whiner, get over it.

You think you have life so rough, think about the people who lost their Dads, Moms, Sons, Daughters on 911.

Give some respect to those fighting so that does not happen again.

You and your obsession with GW is sooooo old. Politicians are Politicians they are all worthless, GW is not the first one to be that way. I thought you were old enough to realize this and mature enough to quit being so unbalanced on your views.

We get it GW is evil, he causes everything! You are such a broken record. I think you will suffer withdraw in a few months when the man is gone from Washington. :roll:
 

Latest posts

Top