Broke 0 #26 November 11, 2005 Too bad out politicians haven'tDivot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #27 November 11, 2005 Quote>Yeah US mil sucks at this restricted warfare crap. However when it > comes to unrestricted roll over the other side campaign we accel at > that. Unfortunately our enemies have figured that out. Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #28 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuote>Yeah US mil sucks at this restricted warfare crap. However when it > comes to unrestricted roll over the other side campaign we accel at > that. Unfortunately our enemies have figured that out. Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. So what genius of a CinC got the US into such a situation? And how does he plan to get the US out of it?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #29 November 11, 2005 >Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will > be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have > been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The > granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich > for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. Indeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #30 November 11, 2005 Quote>Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will > be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have > been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The > granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich > for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. Indeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Do you want to play tic-tac-tocDivot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #31 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote>Yeah US mil sucks at this restricted warfare crap. However when it > comes to unrestricted roll over the other side campaign we accel at > that. Unfortunately our enemies have figured that out. Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. So what genius of a CinC got the US into such a situation? And how does he plan to get the US out of it? What? You don't think these situations have been faced in just about every armed conflict this country has been involved in? You think we've never been involved in urban combat operations before? I wasn't saying that we can't do it, I was saying it's dangerous, and we know how to do it. That doesn't make it easy or fun. It's extremely tough training up for it, and it's tough for those so far that are putting it into practice.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #32 November 11, 2005 Quote Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. If I recall there was quite a bit of urban warefare in WWII, but we just leveled the buildings with carpet bombing, and didn't give a shit about colaterol damageDivot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #33 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Yeah US mil sucks at this restricted warfare crap. However when it > comes to unrestricted roll over the other side campaign we accel at > that. Unfortunately our enemies have figured that out. Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. So what genius of a CinC got the US into such a situation? And how does he plan to get the US out of it? What? You don't think these situations have been faced in just about every armed conflict this country has been involved in? You think we've never been involved in urban combat operations before? I wasn't saying that we can't do it, I was saying it's dangerous, and we know how to do it. That doesn't make it easy or fun. It's extremely tough training up for it, and it's tough for those so far that are putting it into practice. [the fight will be] "weeks rather than months.". Dick Cheney, March 2003 "it could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." Rumsfeld, March 2003 "They will greet us as liberators", Cheney, March 2003 "...throw flowers at our troops", Ann Coulter, 2003 "Mission Accomplished" - you know who, 2003.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #34 November 11, 2005 I don't rember who said it but durring WWII they said "We'll all be home by Christmass." That didn't happen either.Divot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #35 November 11, 2005 QuoteI don't rember who said it but durring WWII they said "We'll all be home by Christmass." That didn't happen either. That was WWI. Geez!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #36 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Yeah US mil sucks at this restricted warfare crap. However when it > comes to unrestricted roll over the other side campaign we accel at > that. Unfortunately our enemies have figured that out. Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. So what genius of a CinC got the US into such a situation? And how does he plan to get the US out of it? What? You don't think these situations have been faced in just about every armed conflict this country has been involved in? You think we've never been involved in urban combat operations before? I wasn't saying that we can't do it, I was saying it's dangerous, and we know how to do it. That doesn't make it easy or fun. It's extremely tough training up for it, and it's tough for those so far that are putting it into practice. [the fight will be] "weeks rather than months.". Dick Cheney, March 2003 "it could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." Rumsfeld, March 2003 "They will greet us as liberators", Cheney, March 2003 "...throw flowers at our troops", Ann Coulter, 2003 "Mission Accomplished" - you know who, 2003. And again ladies and gentlemen another stellar example of dodging the question. It's a tangent, I know, from the humor intended in the thread (sorry about that). This is, unfortunately, a common tactic I've observed by those that oppose the war at any cost. It was stated that the US military's strength lies not with restricted warfare, but unrestricted theaters of combat. I cited that our forces have been training for exactly that, and yes, it's tough. You state that it's Bush's fault. I state that our forces have been involved before. You quote stuff that doesn't serve your point. So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #37 November 11, 2005 >I was saying it's dangerous, and we know how to do it. That doesn't > make it easy or fun. It's extremely tough training up for it, and it's > tough for those so far that are putting it into practice. I think if the people planning this war had made that clear, instead of glad-handing it as a walk in the park, there would be a lot fewer people now who think they have been lied to. And the war would have a lot more support than it does now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #38 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteI don't rember who said it but durring WWII they said "We'll all be home by Christmass." That didn't happen either. That was WWI. Geez! I belileve it happened in both warsDivot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #39 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteI don't rember who said it but durring WWII they said "We'll all be home by Christmass." That didn't happen either. That was WWI. Geez! I belileve it happened in both wars I believe you are wrong. No one expected to defeat Hitler by December 1939 or Japan by December 25, 1941.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #40 November 11, 2005 Hey, he was THERE (both times)!! Take his word for it! Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #41 November 11, 2005 warned the President that it might be necessary to send up to 5 marines to get things under control *** Reminds me of the story from the turbulent 60's, when a riot at the University in Austin threatened to wreck the city. The mayor of Austin requested the Governor to send in the National guard, but the Gov. declined...instead sending a Texas Ranger. ONE Texas Ranger the mayor asked??? Well...it is only ONE riot....the Governor replied! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plutoniumsalmon 0 #42 November 11, 2005 there is no point in sending the marines to france as it has no natural resources that bush might want and it is not after 'your' freedom and american way of lifePointy birds Oh pointy pointy Anoint my head Anointy nointy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #43 November 11, 2005 it has no natural resources *** Wine & Babes! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
noluckned 0 #44 November 11, 2005 Quick.....everybody get your ass to France. Take advantate of the confusion to BASE jump the Eiffel tower.......get moving while there is still time. *Disclaimer* The views expressed in the above post may or may not be the result of drunkeness or temporary insanity and should only rarely be construed as the views of the poster himself Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wopelao 0 #45 November 11, 2005 QuoteIndeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Your such a cunning linguist. Another veiled way to claim that anyone who actually signed up is dumb, unlike you.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dbattman 0 #46 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuote>Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will > be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have > been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The > granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich > for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. Indeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Do you want to play tic-tac-toc How about a nice game of chess? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wopelao 0 #47 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote>Urban/restricted warfare is extremely dangerous and casualties will > be much higher, versus the "unrestricted" movements that have > been mentioned. Most armies are broadswords in nature. The > granular scenarios that could be faced end up being a shit-sandwich > for everyone, and it's not necessarily due to lack of ability. Indeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Do you want to play tic-tac-toc How about a nice game of chess? Yes, whatever it is as long as it is not scrabble Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #48 November 11, 2005 >Another veiled way to claim that anyone who actually signed up is dumb, unlike you. Nope. The only way to win a war like this is to not start it. I spent five years designing weapons for the US, and I admire anyone who serves their country in the military. The military is like a gun; it is inherently not evil or dangerous. It is the one who wields military power who must make good decisions on how to use it. If he makes bad decisions, it is not the fault of the military that they have been misused. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #49 November 11, 2005 Quoteit is not the fault of the military that they have been misused. Yup, those mindless soldiers, no smarter than bullets ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #50 November 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteIndeed. It's a game no one wins - except those who are smart enough not to sign up for the game to begin with. Your such a cunning linguist. Another veiled way to claim that anyone who actually signed up is dumb, unlike you.. *** Signs up for the GAME not for the service... The sword itself is a tool and carries with it an inherent honor, those who wield it may not use it for honorable purposes. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
