If Nick wants a Discussion, let us talk about something.

[Buffalo Phil]

I am on limited time here at work so I'll make the discussion point short and sweet.

It is widely know that we infact have troops overseas all over the Middle East fighting a group of rebel insurgents funded by underground terrorist cells and armed by the fleeing Russians of nearly 20 years ago.

War and Conflict is still broiling in Northern Africa in the Country of Libya where America has made an attempt with Naval Firepower to disable Qadaffi's defences and give the rebels fighting there a chance.

The problem is that the Rebel's we are attemping to help are the exact rebels that we are fighting a quarter of a world away.

So, do you support American Military Might to withdraw from Afganistan / Iraq and mobilize troops inside Libya to dethrone Qadaffi whilst in the middle of a political tornado of anti-war sentiment and a Commander in Chief that has won the Nobel Peace Prize for pledging peace in the middle east?

I believe that mobilizing troops against Qadaffi and helping the rebel's would be a total kick in our ass because we would be tearing down what we have fought for in the middle east all along.

Discuss.

[Ruepart Hoaxley]

Peace and flowers.

[Nick]

Yay discussion

I think the US should withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan in a reasonable timely manner.

The Libya operation is completely pointless and a waste of time and money

[Ruepart Hoaxley]

But really.

America's military bigwigs need to do some more fact checking before putting troops in some other place they may not belong.

[HeavyMetal]

i am in support of conflicts in our nations interest to bettering our country and way of life, as well as "protecting our freedom" (bogus buzz phrase, but you get the point)

i feel as though issues with violence and immigration with mexico may be a bigger deal than libya, but then again i am not defense secretary so i dont have all the necessary information to make bold claims

i disagree with fighting other nations battles for them, however it isnt that simple IMO ever.

lots of people like to make bold claims and assumptions with either no info whatsoever beyond what the news tells them, or with too limited information

sometimes its OK to accept you do not have the necessary facts to understand why we are somewhere doing something, and that it isnt always a BAD THING that you dont have those facts.

accept the world is a dangerous place full of necessary action, and that if you look past all the rainbows and unicorns of "peace and love" you will understand that america is what it is because what needs to be done is done, and thats all there is to it.

Top dog will always reign supreme, until they let their guard down to the next dog. There IS NO simple answer to "should we withdraw". It isnt ""zomg we are doing the wrong thing and we arre nosey" and "we need to know what we are doing betterzzz!!"

America is the "alpha male" of the world, and there are plenty of other aspiring alphas that would gladly take that title the second the chance is given. Realize this and everything becomes a little easier to swallow. Cultures since the dawn of time, man and animal, have been run by alpha male mentality, and that isnt about to change.

IMO anyone who considers that "wrong" has their blinders on to the true nature of the world and man. we are talkin about the facts, the primal nature. everything in life boils down to primal, behind the facade of manners and courtesy and "civilized" behavior.

[HeavyMetal]

i win

[cherokee-at-16]

I think if we are going to go to war anywhere, we might might as well go all in. We have been In the middle east 10 years, what if we threw everything we had at them for 3 years. They seem to always play around with the idea of war, trying to pretend we are not there but really just drawing it out. I support actions abroad, but they need to compact their actions to when the whole nation is still rallying.

[HeavyMetal]

I think if we are going to go to war anywhere, we might might as well go all in. We have been In the middle east 10 years, what if we threw everything we had at them for 3 years.

everything we had at who?

i agree with you, however we won the "war" in a matter of days

the "restructuring/rebuilding/occupation" phase is a little bit different of a process. unconventional conflict is the best way to describe the type of war we have been in for 10 years

[Nick]

I think if we are going to go to war anywhere, we might might as well go all in. We have been In the middle east 10 years, what if we threw everything we had at them for 3 years. They seem to always play around with the idea of war, trying to pretend we are not there but really just drawing it out. I support actions abroad, but they need to compact their actions to when the whole nation is still rallying.

Its not really a war anymore. The US isn't fighting a government in Iraq or Afghanistan, the military is trying to combat an enemy thats a militant one moment and a civilian the next, its nearly impossible. It's like shooting into water, another haji is just going to come in and fill the void.

Theres no benefit to America that arises out of staying for prolonged periods in the middle east. It legitimately makes me sad to see the stories on the news everyday of soldiers dying while they fight a politicians war.

We have enough problems here at home, let's focus on fixing our current issues before we start meddling in other peoples' disputes.

[cherokee-at-16]

everything we had at who?

Who..Who every shot at our soldiers as they drove through. They never really told me. Al Qaeda was thrown around a lot, so I guess them. Who ever government deemed bad.


And I use the term war just as everyone has since Korea, Fighting a limited war(i.e. "conflict") against someone without congress' approving.

[HeavyMetal]

Who..Who every shot at our soldiers as they drove through. They never really told me. Al Qaeda was thrown around a lot, so I guess them. Who ever government deemed bad.


And I use the term war just as everyone has since Korea, Fighting a limited war(i.e. "conflict") against someone without congress' approving.

by everything i assume you mean tanks, aircraft, 1000s of men, shipborn missiles, so on

how do you intend they employ these tactics and weapons against small groups of combatants in urban environments?

the days of WWII city leveling is long gone

[cherokee-at-16]

by everything i assume you mean tanks, aircraft, 1000s of men, shipborn missiles, so on

how do you intend they employ these tactics and weapons against small groups of combatants in urban environments?

the days of WWII city leveling is long gone

I don't know how I would employ those tactics, its really not my job to. I can only guess that our leaders know something about who they intend to fight before they actually start. Like a way to identify whose bad or not, like maybe they were a special color turban at terrorist meetings or something (kkk reference..I can only use what I know) and if they have that then their bad. I'm not a military Tactician, maybe a police line spanning the entire country going through everything like searching for a missing person. I have no idea, but whats the difference between half a million troops over 10 years or 3 years. 10 people work 10 hours that's 100 man hours, 100 people work 1 hour that's 100 man hours. Same amount of work except one is done faster.

[HeavyMetal]

I don't know how I would employ those tactics, its really not my job to. I can only guess that our leaders know something about who they intend to fight before they actually start. Like a way to identify whose bad or not, like maybe they were a special color turban at terrorist meetings or something (kkk reference..I can only use what I know) and if they have that then their bad. I'm not a military Tactician, maybe a police line spanning the entire country going through everything like searching for a missing person. I have no idea, but whats the difference between half a million troops over 10 years or 3 years. 10 people work 10 hours that's 100 man hours, 100 people work 1 hour that's 100 man hours. Same amount of work except one is done faster.

[cherokee-at-16]

I'm not sure either, just discussin.

[Nick]

I don't know how I would employ those tactics, its really not my job to. I can only guess that our leaders know something about who they intend to fight before they actually start. Like a way to identify whose bad or not, like maybe they were a special color turban at terrorist meetings or something (kkk reference..I can only use what I know) and if they have that then their bad. I'm not a military Tactician, maybe a police line spanning the entire country going through everything like searching for a missing person. I have no idea, but whats the difference between half a million troops over 10 years or 3 years. 10 people work 10 hours that's 100 man hours, 100 people work 1 hour that's 100 man hours. Same amount of work except one is done faster.

Surely you jest...