[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mine too. Who says they’re unhappy about Gen. Patreus stepping in?[/quote]
Well, it just seems to me like that particular fact is lost on many… based on comments on this site and elsewhere. Credit where credit’s due - that kind of thing… I thought BDS was bad. Annoyed me like Helheimen.
But it seems like ODS it just as prevalent…
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mine too. Who says they’re unhappy about Gen. Patreus stepping in?[/quote]
Well, it just seems to me like that particular fact is lost on many… based on comments on this site and elsewhere. Credit where credit’s due - that kind of thing… I thought BDS was bad. Annoyed me like Helheimen.
But it seems like ODS it just as prevalent…
[/quote]
I see. Well thank you so much for that.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mine too. Who says they’re unhappy about Gen. Patreus stepping in?[/quote]
Well, it just seems to me like that particular fact is lost on many… based on comments on this site and elsewhere. Credit where credit’s due - that kind of thing… I thought BDS was bad. Annoyed me like Helheimen.
But it seems like ODS it just as prevalent…
[/quote]
I see. Well thank you so much for that.[/quote]
Look, I’m not from the US. I get that part, and I understand that you guys are sick and tired of US bashing. There’s been way too much of that, and I’d be pissed too. I’m not being facetious or anything here.
Nevertheless, shit like this worries me: Rep. Gohmert Touts Column Comparing President Obama To Hitler Over Handling Of BP - YouTube
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
Nevertheless, shit like this worries me: [/quote]
It shouldn’t. As far back as 2001, the Left has made - no, perfected - the art form of reducing every political disagreement down to an analogy to their opponents being Nazis.
This guy isn’t so much scary as he is the guy who annoys his comrades with outdated catchphrases.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mine too. Who says they’re unhappy about Gen. Patreus stepping in?[/quote]
And while Petraeus will carry out the McChrystal mission, he apparently won’t be a mirror image of the ousted general - word is, Petraeus may relax McChrystal’s very strict rules of engagement (“courageous restraint”) and might be apt to blood a few noses a little faster.
One other interesting issue - Obama and Petraeus have clashed before. Problem is, Petraeus is, frankly, brilliant and will now get a spotlight that McChrystal didn’t have.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
As far back as 2008, the Right has made - no, perfected - the art form of reducing every political disagreement down to an analogy to their opponents being Commies.
[/quote]
Fixed.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]Otep wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
This kind of counter insurgency requires a functioning local government with lets say less than rampant corruption. Afghanistan is a fucking NARCO-STATE. Good luck with that.
[/quote]
Not for long.
See thread on mineral deposits/extractive resources.
China will have Afghanistan for supper.[/quote]
I’ll check out the thread but I dont see how raw minerals are gonna change afghanistan. What have they done for Africa?
[/quote]
Sorry. I meant to take umbrage with the ‘narco-state’ portion. I do not believe afghanistan’s social or political structure will improve, but that they will change from growing poppies to living off of government subidies delivered courtesy of whatever Chinese mining company gets the lease to Afghanistan’s ore.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mine too. Who says they’re unhappy about Gen. Patreus stepping in?[/quote]
And while Petraeus will carry out the McChrystal mission, he apparently won’t be a mirror image of the ousted general - word is, Petraeus may relax McChrystal’s very strict rules of engagement (“courageous restraint”) and might be apt to blood a few noses a little faster.
One other interesting issue - Obama and Petraeus have clashed before. Problem is, Petraeus is, frankly, brilliant and will now get a spotlight that McChrystal didn’t have.
[/quote]
The 2007 senate hearing in which the diapered bookworm “schools” the decorated general is painful to watch. Literally painful. The bottom line going forward with this is if Afghanistan ends well the C in C emerges looking to have handled this brilliantly. If not, he, Patreus and the United States can put another Vietnam in the history books and Patreus will become the Westmoreland of the day with nobody in particular playing the role of Giap (Gjap, Gap?) which looks even worse than Vietnam.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]Otep wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
This kind of counter insurgency requires a functioning local government with lets say less than rampant corruption. Afghanistan is a fucking NARCO-STATE. Good luck with that.
[/quote]
Not for long.
See thread on mineral deposits/extractive resources.
China will have Afghanistan for supper.[/quote]
I’ll check out the thread but I dont see how raw minerals are gonna change afghanistan. What have they done for Africa?
[/quote]
^MADE other countries very, very rich. From Rome down the line.
[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
Fixed.[/quote]
I wish you were smarter, but alas.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The 2007 senate hearing in which the diapered bookworm “schools” the decorated general is painful to watch. Literally painful. The bottom line going forward with this is if Afghanistan ends well the C in C emerges looking to have handled this brilliantly. If not, he, Patreus and the United States can put another Vietnam in the history books and Patreus will become the Westmoreland of the day with nobody in particular playing the role of Giap (Gjap, Gap?) which looks even worse than Vietnam. [/quote]
Yes, and recall that McChrystal was hand-picked by Obama, and we saw that how turned out. If the favored McChrystal thought Obama et al. “wimps” or otherwise ineffective in Afghanistan, a more hawkish Petraeus, I suspect, may have even more grievances. And I don’t think Obama has it in him to “unleash” Petraeus in Afghanistan they way Bush did in Iraq, and Petraeus is a powerful enough (and smart enough) figure where that disconnect will likely be a problem.
Afghanistan is looking pretty bad. Petraeus is the “best man for the job”, but I am beginning to wonder what Obama thinks “the job” actually is.
Especially since he spent the whole presidential campaign proclaiming Iraq a waste and Afghanistan the must win war.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
Nevertheless, shit like this worries me: [/quote]
It shouldn’t. As far back as 2001, the Left has made - no, perfected - the art form of reducing every political disagreement down to an analogy to their opponents being Nazis.
This guy isn’t so much scary as he is the guy who annoys his comrades with outdated catchphrases.[/quote]
What about this, then? Moveon weren’t much better, but does that justify anything?
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
What about this, then? Moveon weren’t much better, but does that justify anything?
http://mediamatters.org/research/201006240076[/quote]
What about it? He is a (mildly) controversial TV host who tries to generate ratings by throwing red meat to his audience. And? Tune into Rachel Maddow - she does the same on her end of the political spectrum.
So what? Do you have a point to this?
For eight years, the Left moaned about the “cold wind of fascism” and a “fourth Reich” all because Bush was elected. Articles and plays were written fantasizing about his assassination. It made our politics dumber.
It was rank idiocy built on the Left’s insatiable desire to always - always - be “victims” fighting against “oppression”, even if they have to conjure up a phantom oppressor for the giant whole in their collective self-esteem, but any rate, they have no currency to complain about the same kind of histrionics now that the shoe is on the other foot.
If the Left doesn’t like the overreactin to Obama, they should have thought about that with respect to their galactic overreaction to Bush.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]Otep wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
This kind of counter insurgency requires a functioning local government with lets say less than rampant corruption. Afghanistan is a fucking NARCO-STATE. Good luck with that.
[/quote]
Not for long.
See thread on mineral deposits/extractive resources.
China will have Afghanistan for supper.[/quote]
I’ll check out the thread but I dont see how raw minerals are gonna change afghanistan. What have they done for Africa?
[/quote]
^MADE other countries very, very rich. From Rome down the line.
[/quote]
I agree that is what happened in Africa. But what you have to marvel at regarding Afghanistan is that it defies either improvement or exploitation. Lets see how heavy machinery fares in the climate.
Lets see how Chinese profits fare after protection money is paid on their completely indefensible trade routes through several different tribal territories. After bribes to a thousand different ministers and warlords. Maybe industry can help afghanistan, but you can be certain it aint gonna help U.S. as it isn’t going to get set up in the next year or two or even three
Barring significant improvements public sentiment is gone in a year.
What did lincoln say about public sentiment? Allow me to look it up right quick.
“With public sentiment nothing can fail; Without it nothing can succeed.”
And in a year or two I would be more than happy to eat my words.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
What about this, then? Moveon weren’t much better, but does that justify anything?
http://mediamatters.org/research/201006240076[/quote]
What about it? He is a (mildly) controversial TV host who tries to generate ratings by throwing red meat to his audience. And? Tune into Rachel Maddow - she does the same on her end of the political spectrum.
So what? Do you have a point to this?
For eight years, the Left moaned about the “cold wind of fascism” and a “fourth Reich” all because Bush was elected. Articles and plays were written fantasizing about his assassination. It made our politics dumber.
It was rank idiocy built on the Left’s insatiable desire to always - always - be “victims” fighting against “oppression”, even if they have to conjure up a phantom oppressor for the giant whole in their collective self-esteem, but any rate, they have no currency to complain about the same kind of histrionics now that the shoe is on the other foot.
If the Left doesn’t like the overreactin to Obama, they should have thought about that with respect to their galactic overreaction to Bush. [/quote]
Your’re letting your anger get the better of you here, I think. I mostly agree with you re: the vilification of Bush. How can you not see that the same thing is happening now?
I think that Obama is a nice guy who’s not quite up to the task at hand. I think he’s a very bright guy, perhaps somewhat naive, but well intentioned. I don’t for a second think he’s out to destroy the US, although there are a lot of conspiracy theories out there. I wish the best for him, the US and by extension the rest of us. Is that so bad?
[quote]Carl_ wrote:
<<< I think that Obama is a nice guy >>>[/quote] So do I[quote]Carl_ wrote:
<<< who’s not quite up to the task at hand. >>>[/quote] If you’re referring to military matters this is the understatement of the century. He shouldn’t even be allowed near a Stratego board.[quote]Carl_ wrote:
<<< I think he’s a very bright guy, >>>[/quote] So do I [quote]Carl_ wrote:
<<< perhaps somewhat naive, but well intentioned. I don’t for a second think he’s out to destroy the US, although there are a lot of conspiracy theories out there. I wish the best for him, the US and by extension the rest of us. Is that so bad?[/quote]I couldn’t disagree more. He is not well intentioned. If by this it’s meant he wants a traditionally strong and exceptional United States. I do not believe he wants to destroy America in the same sense that Osama Bin Laden does. He does not want to see our cites burn. He does want to reinvent her into a diminished, more just and fair diluted version of herself with a distinct emphasis on stirring her into the world community. For the United States of America, that is destruction. To Americans still bearing a shadow of her founding that is destruction. To someone in Norway that’s a shrug of the shoulders. “what’s wrong with that?”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Davey, I thought we hustled you off to the train paintin’ yard. Why are you back already?[/quote]
Why would anybody want to paint rain…? Just get paint all over the ground and all.