User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 80

  1. #11
    Senior Member LostInNerSpace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,027

    Default

    The question of whether or not the cause is just is not the point. If we give people a job to do we should give them the means to do it and don't undermine their expert opinion. If they are not experts get people who are experts.

    If politicians undermine expert opinions and thing goes wrong, who is to blame? Politicians are driven by public opinion so we should beat them with that stick when they screw up.

  2. #12
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    The public would get behind our troop commitments, if they had a better more important job to do there than they do here.

    You mean to say, that fighting overseas is more important than Mexican drug cartels killing our citizens HERE????

    This is what is nuts about this whole situation, it's like I'm the only one that sees this.
    At this point, whether it was a just war or not, we need to complete the objective of attaining a stable country that will not harbor terrorists. While no friend to drugs, I think that is more important right now.

    Besides the answer to the drug problem isn't just in Mexico--it's in other countries and in our own too. Plus people choose drugs, we didn't choose 9/11

    And history shows that Americans care more about whether they are winning or losing than being concerned about what else there is to do. When the public thinks we are losing, then we eventually do, if only because politicians are unwilling to enact effective measures in the involvement.
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

  3. #13
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    The public would get behind our troop commitments, if they had a better more important job to do there than they do here.

    You mean to say, that fighting overseas is more important than Mexican drug cartels killing our citizens HERE????

    This is what is nuts about this whole situation, it's like I'm the only one that sees this.
    Christ, we have dirty cops on every force around the nation dealing drugs, and you give a shit about the Mexicans?

  4. #14
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Ok I'll bite.

    So, you are saying, that we don't need a justification for the ongoing slaughter of the people of a foreign nation?

    This is the problem with revenge, it's blind, and it never stops.

  5. #15
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    After our first soldier died, we had all the justification we would ever need to stay...

  6. #16
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    This is why you can't just go to war lightly.

    Once you go you have to stay.

  7. #17
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Ok I'll bite.

    So, you are saying, that we don't need a justification for the ongoing slaughter of the people of a foreign nation?

    This is the problem with revenge, it's blind, and it never stops.
    If there actually were a "slaughter" and purely revenge driven mission, then maybe-maybe-there would be a problem. I don't think you're grasping what's going on and what our mission is though...

    To clarify, tell me everything you know about the conflict.
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

  8. #18
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Generals always want more troop numbers, whether it's right or wrong, but it's their job to try and get as much resources as they can take, with the way it's set up.

    But there are only about 100 Al-Qaeda members in Afghanistan, so that's thousands and thousands of US troops for every 1 Al-Qaeda member. I think there are more productive places we could be focusing on, and with less much less troops. By staying in Afghanistan, we will have the chance to limit Taliban power in the region, even if we have to work with moderate Taliban factions, which do exist. That could be a good thing. But we only attacked the Taliban in the first place because they were harboring Al-Qaeda, and now they're not there.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    After our first soldier died, we had all the justification we would ever need to stay...
    Oh god I hate that logic, sorry. How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? Isn't one one too many?

  9. #19
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    I don't need to.

    I'm not saying we should pull out, we can't, we're gonna have to make this baby and hope it doesn't have webbed feet.

    I'm saying we shouldn't have gone in, in the first place.

    If we hadn't, the entire world would have been ready to go for us, once we eventually decided to do so.

    Then, we would of had the troop strength we needed from the beginning.

  10. #20
    Supreme Allied Commander Take Five's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Generals always want more troop numbers, whether it's right or wrong, but it's their job to try and get as much resources as they can take, with the way it's set up.

    But there are only about 100 Al-Qaeda members in Afghanistan, so that's thousands and thousands of US troops for every 1 Al-Qaeda member. I think there are more productive places we could be focusing on, and with less much less troops. By staying in Afghanistan, we will have the chance to limit Taliban power in the region, even if we have to work with moderate Taliban factions, which do exist. That could be a good thing. But we only attacked the Taliban in the first place because they were harboring Al-Qaeda, and now they're not there..
    They may come back--that's the issue.
    Johari Nohari

    "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. "--Niccolo Machiavelli

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-26-2010, 09:08 PM
  2. So what shall I fill the field in with now ?
    By entropie in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-12-2009, 08:54 PM
  3. Which field of science holds the most potential in the coming century?
    By yenom in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 01-03-2009, 11:15 PM
  4. Which field of science holds the most potential in the coming century
    By yenom in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-29-2008, 01:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO