Friday, November 25, 2005

CHILDREN OF THE GRAVE. a three part series

Several topics have come together and begged to be examined. Information presented alone is often far different than that same information presented in the light of other ideas. Over the next few days, I hope to provide Eyes-On level info with a large amount of rhetoric in hopes of challenging your stance on this "war", the government, the media, and how you allow yourselves to be swayed. I present none of this as conclusive or as the only correct point of view.

Let the disillusionment begin....

Revolution in their minds
The children start to march
Against the world in which they have to live
And all the hate that's in their hearts
They're tired of being pushed around
Andtold just what to do
They'll fight the world until they've won
And love comes flowing through.

- Children of the Grave, Black Sabbath

Part 1 - Troop Levels and Base Closings

Much debate has been happening lately over an Exit Plan. From what I have seen, the opposition calls for a drastic and complete removal of all troops while the current administration wants to "stay the course". We all should know by now that the "course" they speak of is undefined to anyone outside that clutch.

I avoid watching the corporate media news as much as possible, but sometimes in the DFAC I am forced to watch the circus sideshow that is displayed as American Culture. The information you are being fed is wholly inaccurate and painted for you in such a way as to have you not doubt or second guess. Numbers are thrown around with the intent to shock and justify, but when comparing apples to apples, the numbers become insignificant.

Troop levels are not the only measurement for progress in Operation Iraqi Freedom. But the media and government want you to believe that it is the sole issue. Sure I agree that fundamentally we need less of me and my friends here in this country, but how many of us is not a direct indicator of how secure Iraq is. Apples to apples, would police levels in Los Angeles dictate the crime level there? Still crime in L.A. but has the government moved to increase cop levels until all murder is eliminated?

Here is a fact that may not have been reported on the news. Several Forward Operating Bases are closing or will be turned over to the Iraqi Army within the next 90 days. I know this first hand, the FOB I have been living on is one an more within my AO (Area of Operation) will follow. This was scheduled way before any Exit Plan debate came to the surface. Does this mean troop reduction? Not necessarily, but it should show that the IA is making progress in being in control of their own country. My battalion is pulling out and being replaced by another element of greater size. Troop levels won't decrease but the number of idle soldiers will.

Commercialization as the goal of "The Reconstruction" should be one of the main factors in determining progress. So far, much has been said about a conversion from our military assets to civilian technologies. There seems to have been little focus on a development for Iraq and more a edification of some of our current FOBs. My picture entitled "Evidence of the Reconstruction" was obviously lost on some of you. The potent statement intended with that picture, besides its tastefully rendered artsy feel, was that in the 11 months I have been a coerced citizen of Iraq, that is the only change I have seen besides laying some asphalt to repair a road. Farther north, civilian/commercial systems have begun replacing our communication equipment. I would deem that a gigantic failure. The new systems with their new high-speed technology are barely operable. Delays on the phone line all but prevent a conversation. Connections are down for days, even though the distance the equipment is handling is less than a 4 mile radius. The new systems only seem to integrate with the existing communication systems when the moon is full on a Tuesday. And it took them the entire time I was here to accomplish such a back flip. So where's the improved infrastructure for Baghdad, Tikrit, Mosul?

What is the news feeding you? What are the protesters really protesting and is it accurate? Anyone remember Aghanistan?

55 Comments:

Blogger Jack Burton said...

Dorman,

Given perfect execution of this operation with the proper post-war planning, do you think our (current government's) vision of free Iraq could have ever been accomplished?

It seems to me that most of what we do wrong there and domestically, is drastically overestimate the civility of the muslim world. We look at these people through the lense of our own society, and they are as far from here to the moon of sharing the basic view of society that we take as a given if you wake up in the United States.

What do you think?

11:48  
Blogger Dorman said...

I agree with your assessment of the muslim world. I have made many points about Islam on this blog and one that has been implied is that the muslim is so used to being subjugated that self-governance is a strange and ominous concept. Governance is so different than domination, which is what the system of Islam is based on. Muslim does mean "one who has submitted" after all. Several muslim countries do have secular governments but are run actually by a muslim shadow government - reference the Iranian structure. Iraq governing themselves, unfortunately, is like allowing a 4 year old to determine his/her diet.

One thing that I am curious about though, Jack, is that you appear to know of the existence of a post-war plan. I have searched for it and all I could ever come up with is waiting for the insurgency to stop because "they'll get tired of getting killed" (according to Rumsfeld). The next installments will touch on more apples to apples comparisons of the propaganda dished out to you concerning the dangers and insurgency.

12:55  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

One thing that I am curious about though, Jack, is that you appear to know of the existence of a post-war plan.


I would also like to know of this plan. As would the majority of this country right now. It's funny, that if soldiers know of no such plan, how is it that bush supporters know that there IS one?

the propaganda dished out to you concerning the dangers and insurgency.


Looking forward to this too.

16:35  
Blogger Dorman said...

Please don't take that statement out of context as disrespectful to Jack. Not intended to at all. I have just not been privvy to the notion of a definite plan.

Also, maybe if I had chosen to be an officer, I would be getting more direct information (propaganda) from the DoD. But I will stay comfortable as a too-big-for-my-britches specialist.

16:48  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

I understand. But it appears not too many people are privvy to the info he knows.

16:58  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Okay, liberal daggers find your target and be happy. I know of no post war plan, and I don't think one really ever existed other than the thought that they will ambrace us with open arms. We all know this is a bad deal, but the question is - what are we going to do about it? We have the same plan that Clinton had when he bombed the scum - nothing. Enjoy the monday morning quarterback sessions, but the truth is, when the libs had the chance, they had nothing better to offer than what we have now.

21:23  
Blogger Shelli said...

Anyone remember Aghanistan?

Funny you ask this. Someone just said to me the other day, "Did we get Osama bin Laden? Are we even still in Afghanistan?"

I mean I know there are stupid people out there, but come on. This is important stuff. Maybe they think, "Oh, we will just let other people worry about it." Sickening.

00:11  
Blogger Dorman said...

Thanks for picking up on that. My point there was that we essentially had the same mission there but it was completed without fanfare or hassle. We justify our continued presence by chasing Osama. Why is Afghanistan so different than Iraq in its media coverage, gov't propaganda, American psyche? Somehow Iraq is "special".

04:24  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

We have the same plan that Clinton had when he bombed the scum - nothing. Enjoy the monday morning quarterback sessions, but the truth is, when the libs had the chance, they had nothing better to offer than what we have now.


So, since Clinton had no "plan" it's ok for these bumbling idiots to not have one? Correct me if I am wrong, but we had no ground troops in Iraq in 98. Big difference.
And the "clinton" excuse is piss poor. I want to see this administration grow a set of balls, admit mistakes instead of pointing fingers and lay out an exit plan.

I won't be holding my breath.

10:33  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Exit plan? What a great idea? As a matter of fact, let's narrow it down to the day and hour so the terrorists know exactly how long they have to hang low and wait.

Clinton didn't have ground troops because his polls told him that troops meant death which meant bad public approval ratings. Exit plans are things you discuss when you get eight years of running the military like it's some kind of fun toy to boost ratings every now and then by bombing a couple of camels or an aspirin factory. They ought to change the cruise missles to Clinton missles. No danger, expect to the poor camel he blew the shit out of.

Exit plans are things that you hang your hat on when you start a fight with some Somali warlord that you don't have the stomach to finish.

This fight has started, for better or worse, and to not finish it will cause more trouble for us later than it's ever going to cause us now. Bloody our nose and we quit, I guess that's our exit strategy. Well guess what, what if the lesson learned by terrorists is that next time, they can kill 100,000 Americans because we don't have the stomach to finish the game.

Well, I guess I should just count my blessings to be in the presence of such strategy experts who obviously saw the whole thing unfolding before the invasion even started. It's very hard to map things out before things get started. It's really easy to do so looking back. Why don't you impress the rest of us a little with some forward thinking and trade in your seat in the peanut gallery?

12:53  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Wow, I checked out your website. Truly breathtaking analysis. Buck Fush? Damn, you must have at least a master's degree to come up with that one.

I don't care if you're a member of the daily kos left, that's well within your rights. But don't think for one moment that your childish bullshit and hindsight 20/20 vision has anything to do with a real plan for our military and our Country.

And you wonder how Republicans keep winning in spite of the overwhelming stupidity of the Bush gang?

13:03  
Blogger Dorman said...

Jack, I agree with 99% if what you say, so here's the 1%...

Exit plan? What a great idea? As a matter of fact, let's narrow it down to the day and hour so the terrorists know exactly how long they have to hang low and wait.

This is pure FUD (Fear Uncertainty Dount) that the propagandists throw around to cloud the issue. What terrorists? There are NONE in Iraq. Every operation needs to have a goal, aka and exit plan. otherwise how does one judge progres?

13:19  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Well, call them what you want, but if you come from outside Iraq and drive a car bomb into a bunch of kids, you're a terrorists in my book.

If the left said here's a list of ten things that must be accomplished for us to leave, some type of metrics that can be tracked, I would agree with that. Free parlimentary elections - check. A certain percentage of non-dependent Iraq battalions - check. Whatever the performance is that would allow us to leave but at the same time give Iraq the best chance of success. Instead of that, I hear of 2006, later this year, etc. Nothing tied to progress, just up and leave.

Well, that's exactly what we did in Vietnam thanks to the traitors in the media (yes, I'm questioning their patriotism) and in turn we got about a million people slaughtered by the commies. Sorry folks, I know you risked everything for us, but we're out of here. Sorry about your luck.

I know there are plenty of people out there who would love nothing more than another another video reel of our last chopper taking off from the roof of the US embassy in Baghdad with the enemy at the gates, but I do not. It took our military 20 years to recover from that, and judging by the nature of islam, we won't have another twenty years to repair ourselves.

14:38  
Blogger Dorman said...

Excellent, now we are having dialogue that may lead somewhere instead of wing-bashing.

To play devil's advocate, we have no enemy here. The "enemy" is a ghost. The "enemy" is the pissed off Haji who is tired of seeing HMMWV's and tanks rolling around town. If we left we'd suffer no further losses.

Haji's enemy is Haji and Islam. Haji has been killing Haji for centuries, it just now gets broadcast on CNN and has more of a central theme. They sink to violence because the Imams rise up to dominate the subjugated sheep, derive power from Islam, and exert their egotistical wills. Bullies essentially. Haji needs to learn to communicate with Haji. This is a country where tribes still war with other tribes.

14:47  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

I totally disagree. The fundamental war is a war between the West and islam. It is all connected. Here in the States, we have infiltration of islam via numerous sources, into our prison systems, into our schools, into our government and yes, into our military. Citics of groups like CAIR are attacked as racists and anti-arab, by CAIR itself and the useful idiots on the left, and unfortunately it seems, the Bush administration

The very same sunnis who are blowing up you guys over there are sponsoring islamic doctrination via Saudi funded CAIR, putting that bullshit in our schools and libraries. And of course the morons in the NEA are more that willing to help them out. You've got to love that the very same political party who treats religion in public as the plague are more than willing to open the door for islam and it's "peaceful" nature. You can't have Christmas but you can play muslim for a week at your local school district.

Dorman, you treat this as totally separate issues, I treat them as one and the same. We either kill them there, and by there I mean the middle east, se asia, africa or wherever they are, or eventually they'll populate our country with their filth and we'll be fighting them here. Some are waking up to the danger, but I fear it will be too little and too late. How can we protect ourselves when stating the obvious results in a "you're a racist" smear campaign started by muslims and all too willingly carried by the left and the mainstream media?

15:06  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

And I believe it's here on your site that you'll find my past writing stating that the best solution is indeed to leave the middle east and let them bomb each other into the stone age. Of course, it's still pretty much the stone age anyway, but you get my point.

Shut down our borders to anyone from there, clean house at the State Department, improve our internal security, and let them kill each other to their little hearts desire. Deport violence advocating leaders and followers of islam here, and put the rest on notice. Your religion will conform to the established rule of law here, or you will leave, plain and simple.

The UN can choose to try and intervene, but they can do it without direct or indirect support from the US. Oh, and those thankless palestinian scum who get more money from us than any other country can find a new benefactor.

I think we'd all be happy.

15:13  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

Wow, I checked out your website. Truly breathtaking analysis. Buck Fush? Damn, you must have at least a master's degree to come up with that one.

I don't care if you're a member of the daily kos left, that's well within your rights. But don't think for one moment that your childish bullshit and hindsight 20/20 vision has anything to do with a real plan for our military and our Country.

And you wonder how Republicans keep winning in spite of the overwhelming stupidity of the Bush gang?


Childish?
You insult my intelligence and think you know me by saying I am a member of the daily kos left. And you call me childish. Those in glass houses.....
Please enlighten us on the 'real' plan the republicans have for the military and this country. I'd like to know, because it sure as hell ain't working.
My blog was never meant to be serious. Hell I don't have enough interesting stuff to put on it.

p.s. don't hold your breath for republicans in 06 and 08.


Exit plan? What a great idea? As a matter of fact, let's narrow it down to the day and hour so the terrorists know exactly how long they have to hang low and wait.

This is pure FUD (Fear Uncertainty Dount) that the propagandists throw around to cloud the issue.


And some people fall for that excuse hook, line and sinker.

16:14  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

It looks like my plan was posted just prior to your tantrum. I guess you missed it.

And yes, I am insulting your intelligence. Just bashing the person who is currently in charge of the country without any semblance of your own ideas doesn't tend of knock my socks off. I've read this site for the past several months and not once have I seen anything original out of you, just criticims of Bush, or the bushies, or even bushilter - whatever the children on the left are calling him.

You see, every major politician called for exactly what Bush did in late 2002. Of course only one person actually has to answer for it and that's the person in charge. Everyone else just throws up their hands and claims Bush lied, people died. That's the beauty of being a monday morning quarterback, you don't have to do anything yourself, don't have to answer for anything, just potshot the person who does.

So here, let me help you articulate your plan. Seriously, answer the following questions and we'll see where you stand.

#1 - in the past 20 years, please tell me what military actions that we've undertaken that in your mind are acceptable, and which we should have that we didn't.

#2 - Do you believe it's acceptable for us to have a military presence in the middle east? If so, where and if not, what would your plan be to protect our oil interests.

#3 - In lieu of being dependent on middle east oil, do you agree with drilling in anwar, and off all coasts? If not, do you believe in loosening regulations on nuclear power generation here in the US?

#4 - How do you feel about illegal immigration. If you feel that tighter borders are in order, how do you feel about dealing with illegals already in place?

#5 - How do you feel about islam in the United States? Do you feel taking religion out of the public across the board is the right course of action? If you do, would you place the same restrictions on islam as you would on, say, Christianity?

#6 - What would you have done with Iraq? What would you have done if you had found out about the UN scandal?

#7 - What are your views of the UN?

#8 - What are your views about the long term mission of the military. Should we be isolationists? Should we pull our troops out of all foreign bases? Do you believe in preemption?

#9 - And finally, what would you do about North Korea and Iran?

Feel free to answer any or all of these. I've heard your constant criticising of the people who actually have to answer for the choices they make, now I'd like to hear how you would do things.

17:39  
Blogger anotherPointOfView said...

Dorman,

>>>Somehow Iraq is "special".<<<

### Iraq has oil. It is
second only to Saudi
Arabia's reserve.
Saudi Arabia is already
in the back pocket of the
US. Interestingly enough
Osama was a Saudi along
15 of the 19 hijackers.
I have never heard of any
particular harsh statments
from the US to Saudi
Arabia. The United States
invaded Afghanistan as it
would allow strategic
bases from which to launch
an invasion into Iraq.
This war is about oil for
country that likes it's
SUV's probably a little
too much for the good of
itself and the rest of
the world. ###

>>> Haji's enemy is Haji and Islam. Haji has been killing Haji for centuries, <<<

### To place in some context to
this last statement, which
I presume is given to cast
the muslim in less human
terms than the western one,
I give an estimate for the
number of deaths that
resulted in WWII, 56,125,262.
The Soviet Union alone lost
21,300,000. China comes in
second with 11,324,000,
followed by Germany with
7,060,000, and Poland with
6,850,000. So perhaps or more
balanced statement along
with "Haji" along you
included the western
"Gringo's and Frogs
and Krauts along with the
rest of humanity". The
figure I gave included
a number of other countries
that are not considered
western exclude those you
don't like and you still
come up with a huge
number.
WWII Deaths ###

19:28  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Burton...is this a pen name that George Bush writes under? or does GWB have his hand so far up your ass that you continue to spew this rhetoric and bash anyone that opposes your view?

19:34  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

There was no plan posted before my "rant". Look up the definition of rant, and then refer to your posts.

And yes, I am insulting your intelligence. Just bashing the person who is currently in charge of the country without any semblance of your own ideas doesn't tend of knock my socks off. I've read this site for the past several months and not once have I seen anything original out of you, just criticims of Bush, or the bushies, or even bushilter - whatever the children on the left are calling him.

I'm supposed to take you seriously when you refer to liberals as communists? Your criticism of the left isn't anything different than what I have heard on Fox News.
Can you be more of a hypocrit?


To answer your questions, Mr. Sarcastic:

1. The Gulf War in 91. Believe it or not, I actually supported Bush sr. on this.
and going into Bosnia.

2. Acceptable? I don't know if I'd use the word acceptable. Necessary? Yes. But not in S.A. Turkey is more of an ally than S.A. Preotect our oil interests? Maybe if this country wasn't so dependant on foreign oil or relied on alternative resources, we wouldn't need to be there at all.
Our friendship with Israel and having troops based in an Arab country (considered Holy Land to the Muslims) fuels the hatred of the U.S. far more than the "hating freedom" bullshit spewed from the bush propaganda machine.

3. ANWAR is protected land, shouldn't be any drilling there. Off coast drilling is the lesser of those two evils. Loosening nuclear power generation to me is a catch22. Would doing so cause another TMI?

4. Legal immigrants I have no problem with. I believe that all illegals need to be deported. Who cares if they, as bush said "will do the jobs americans won't". The borders are a disgrace only further neglected by this administration.

5. I know quite a few Muslims, and contrary to some of the beliefs here in this country, they are not all terrorists. They have their extremists, as there are extremists on the left and the right. I don't believe in public worship, period. If you place restrictions on one religion, you need to do the same for all religions.

6. I would have given the inspectors more time, like they were supposed to have. This war was started not because of the atrocities committed by hussein. The primary and dominant reason was WMD's. Not sanctions violations or the other bunk fed to the american people.
UN scandal? Wasn't there a few Texas oilmen involved in the food-for-oil scandal?

7. I find that the UN basically has no real authority, and is basically set up to look like there are nations who actually give a crap about the welfare of other nations. If that's the case, then why are the atrocities in Sudan still occurring?

8. I'm not a military expert, but IMO the military should protect the United States and not play world police. There are few instances where we should get involved in other country's affairs....ironic how we are so worried about the Kurds but not the people in Sudan...wonder why.
No, troops shouldn't be pulled out of foreign bases.
I believe in preemption. Just when it is justified. A preemptive strike against S.A. (you know the country that bred the 9/11 terrorists) would have been more appropriate instead of the bullshit excuses and tying Iraq to 9/11 that was fed to the american people by the propaganda machine.

9. Nuclear or is it nuculur....disarmament talks should have been held long before talk of invading Iraq and lumping those two countries along with Irtaq as the axis of evil. That stupid juvenile speach just made teh NK's more defiant and now there is a distinct anti-US leader in Iran, along with a pro-Iran government in Iraq.


I amswered your questions, all of them.
Have fun bashing my opinion, like many others, that is different than yours.
You even have the sac to disagree with someone who is actually in the military and just might know a whole hell of a lot more than you, regarding this situation.

Unless someone agrees with your opinion they are wrong. Amazing.
What's it like being right all the time? *rollseyes*

19:59  
Blogger Dorman said...

APoV, I use "Haji" as a collective term for muslim middle-easterners whose warring cultures continue to conflict. You are right that war is not isloated to Haji, that wasn't my point. Most of the deaths on the american media are insurgents killing Iraqis. OK, here they blow each other up, in america they shoot each other. We can't set the standard to eliminating all violent crimes from Iraq as our trigger to exit.

Afghanistan has the largest natural gas deposit....in the Caspian Sea, we have not launched one offensive to Iraq from Afghanistan because Iran is in the way.

We are not dependent on Middle eats oil, plenty other suppliers we buy from and sell to, saudi is not #1. We apparently like saudi because they line politicians' pockets and they offer a connection to the muslim world to help stave off a full on jihad against the infidel.

21:46  
Blogger anotherPointOfView said...

Dorman, I understood what your point was. But it comes across as if "Haji" is the only one doing the killing. What your point is and how it comes across are two different things. This is from Jack:

>>> We either kill them there, and by there I mean the middle east, se asia, africa or wherever they are, or eventually they'll populate our country with their filth and we'll be fighting them here. <<<

### Some how the language of 1939 to 1945 come to mind. The problem is who gets to decide who does the killin. Whose a good "them" and whose a bad "them". It's slipper slope. If the army gets to decide, maybe some civlians back home in America should help with some of the decision making. If Islam is free game, why not burn a mosque in your neighborhood Jack. In keeping with what is meant and what is conveyed. While you claim a rational argument for the death of Islam, what result in the end will be all but rational. In the end you will have people like Jack that blurry "them" abroad and at home. This is the fundamental problem with "rational" arguments

As for reconstruction and however the United States helicopter, at some point it must. From what I hear from Iraq from news on the web and this particular blog < href="http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com//"> from an iraqi female in her mid 20's - Riverbemd"> She is from Baghdad, she has family members whos are both Sunni and Shiite. She is remarkable articulate and she speaks about the reality of the US occupation in convincing terms. Definetely daily life was not plagued by gasoline shortages, line ups and and sucide bombings. This constant news of daily deaths, 30 in front of a hospital, a family in a mini van gunned down by US soldiers , and so on will make people in your country think many times over of the value the Iraqi invasion. I think if these kilings would stop along with the deaths of US soldiers. The United States public would begin to support the war in Iraq. There seem to be no end to the bombers. Perhaps these missions in Anbar province will stem the tide. Then perhaps I think your mission may have a chance. But as long as the bombs tear people apart, I think public pressure will continue to call for a withdrawal. It is now approaching 2006. Bush and whoever helps has less than 2 years to stop sucide bombers. In December there will be an election. Given the pattern of the bombings they will increase until this day, then subside and increase again. The elections themselves will most likely alienate further the Sunni population among whose ranks form the backbone of the rebellion. How many wives, daughters, and brothers and sister they will loose before they themselves find their revenge on their Shiite neighbors and then they once again in turn.

Needless to say I am pessimistic about a withdrawal before 2008. Hand in hand with this the end of the brutality from either side(s). Of course the withdrawal would not be the equivalent of the helicopters taking off from the roofs of the US Embassy, in all likely hood some kind of UN / Nato alliance would be formed along the US to withdraw signifcant numbers of troops. The wild card right now is what happens in Iran.

###

23:42  
Blogger Bill W said...

Dorman - you are obviously an intelligent guy, so your "we don't have a plan" is just a thin veneer for your feelings.

The plan has only been stated about 1000 times -

1. Appointed Interim govenrment, June of 2004;
2. First elections for interim government, January of 2005
3. Select delegates to draw up constitution, and draw up the constitution
4. Government ratifies in August
5. Iraqi people vote up or down in October of 2005.
6. If passed, elect first permanent government December of 2005.
7. In the meantime, train Iraqi Police, National Guard & Army (and hopefully, since you are there, you won't fall for the "well it only takes us six weeks to train recruites, what's wrong over there?" For those that have not thought it through, we send recruits through an already established program at already established bases, and then they integrate into already established armed forces, which have already established NCO staff and Officer staff and already established bases, uniforms, equipment, supply chain, etc, etc, etc.)
8. As they get better at standing up, we stand down. You yourself talked about that happening, and every day you can read about it on the milblogs.

All of this plan has been laid out many times and it is intellectually dishonest to act like you don't know about it.

For all of those that said we came in without a plan, I was on the ground in Iraq when Bremer and his team came in, and worked 18 hour days setting up a Justice system, a banking system, healthcare, women't rights, went to each province to set up local elections to get ready for the above steps.

Have there been mistakes? I am sure there have been, but most of those cited in the media are about choices, not necessarily mistakes (troop levels, disbanding the Iraqi military...). History will judge whether they were mistakes or not-- not the pundits and armchair generals in the media today.

09:50  
Blogger brainhell said...

'Clutch?' I prefer 'cabal.'

glbiepoo

12:44  
Blogger Dorman said...

Thanks Bill. Maybe I should clarify my position that we have no plan.... We have no true plan that is managed properly or adhered to so as to move toward our exodus and Iraqi sovereignty.

I am on a base where a majority of IA training has taken place and will soon be turned over to the IA. I am close friends with the trainers.

All of our efforts are grossly overstaffed and horribly unmotivated as I personally have seen them. I don't doubt many services have been rendered for the good of the country, but 150,000 American troops to accomplish the feat is unnecessary. Too many troops down here on vacation at Anaconda & Speicher. BTW, if you all have not noticed, the numbers of US troops slowly increases at a rate that isn't too overt. So troop reductions may just bring us back down to where we were last year at this time while Joe Public thinks there has been real progress. Subtle.

13:07  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

RC - thanks for answering. It is amazing, however, that you accuse me of "knowing it all" but can't stand the thought of writing some coherent answers without ripping on Bush personally. Yeah, the nuclear joke was kinda funny about 5 years ago, but now it's pathetic. Your hatred of Bush certainly equals or exceeds the vast right wing consiracy that was after Clinton. It's amazing that someone can write several paragraphs of good answers and still act like a jackass with your cracks on Bush. Beyond that, thank you for answering.

APOV, there's no group out there, religious or otherwise, who's main goal is to implement their brand of rule on me and my family other than islam. A rule that includes no religious freedom, no rights for anyone who doesn't share their beliefs, honor killings, child mutilation, death to gays, etc. I could go on and on but my fingers would be worn out if I typed everything that I've heard has been done in the name of islam. So yes, I would prefer that we wipe out the whole lot of them. There has been many opportunities for the alleged mainstream muslims to denounce what has been done in there name, but I can't recall hearing much of an outpouring of support from the masses. One thing I have learned from them, if someone says they want to kill you, you should start taking them seriously.

13:09  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

One final thing Robert, I come from a military family. My father and I were in the Marines, my brother is a Navy Commander, all my uncles were military. I think I can speak somewhat intelligently of matters regarding the armed forces.

Nice try, however.

13:12  
Blogger Dorman said...

I have been very outspoken about Islam on this blog, but very open to muslims. And I just want to summarize my position as this.... Islam embodies all that is UnAmerican. Jack deftly enumerated those aspects. Sure there is the guise of goodness, which to me equals the lunchmeat around the pill.

13:40  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

Yeah, the nuclear joke was kinda funny about 5 years ago, but now it's pathetic. Your hatred of Bush certainly equals or exceeds the vast right wing consiracy that was after Clinton. It's amazing that someone can write several paragraphs of good answers and still act like a jackass with your cracks on Bush. Beyond that, thank you for answering.

Fyi, bush only started pronouncing nuclear correctly last year. When the man who holds the highest office in the land can't form coherent sentences or replies to questions, don't be offended when people poke fun of him.
Again, I think you should stop throwing stones when claiming that someone is acting like a jackass, when you do the same with your backhanded comments.

Thanks for reading my answers. It's a shame you can't compliment someone w/o throwing in a personal attack or two.

One final thing Robert, I come from a military family. My father and I were in the Marines, my brother is a Navy Commander, all my uncles were military. I think I can speak somewhat intelligently of matters regarding the armed forces.


I'm sure you do. But when you try and tell someone who is currently in Iraq that his take on things is wrong, when he is actually living the situation first hand, it makes you look foolish.

13:40  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Robert,

Show me one instance where I've told Dorman his take on things is wrong. I don't think you'll find it, unless I was drunk and don't remember. I respect what Dorman has to say greatly and repeatedly have stated my thanks to him for what's he's doing so don't put words in my mouth.

As for the nuclear thing, you say the highest person in the land should know how to pronounce it, I say the highest person in the land should be able to keep his dick in his pants in the oval office with some slut intern. I'll take bad pronounciation over lack of character any day of the week. We can go round and round on these issues forever, the point being that your hatred of Bush colors everything you write here. Anyone who actually says "Bush lied, people died" has absolutely no historical knowledge of the events of the past 15 years nor the prevailing opinion of overyone, foreign and domestic, leading up to the war. That's just some stinking hippy catch phrase that means nothing more than the person saying it gets their world view from the likes of Michael Moore.

You don't find me being the right's echo chamber and blindly defending all things Bush, so don't be the same for the left.

14:00  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

To play devil's advocate, we have no enemy here. The "enemy" is a ghost. The "enemy" is the pissed off Haji who is tired of seeing HMMWV's and tanks rolling around town. If we left we'd suffer no further losses.

Haji's enemy is Haji and Islam. Haji has been killing Haji for centuries, it just now gets broadcast on CNN and has more of a central theme. They sink to violence because the Imams rise up to dominate the subjugated sheep, derive power from Islam, and exert their egotistical wills. Bullies essentially. Haji needs to learn to communicate with Haji. This is a country where tribes still war with other tribes.


you disagreed with this post, which for all intents and purposes, what you wrote in reply to it was basically telling Dean he was wrong.

As for the nuclear thing, you say the highest person in the land should know how to pronounce it, I say the highest person in the land should be able to keep his dick in his pants in the oval office with some slut intern. I'll take bad pronounciation over lack of character any day of the week.

See this is where you think you know me. Was I embarrassed that Clinton did this? Absolutely. Was getting knob in the oval office an impeachable offense? No. If he had only told the truth while under oath, we would have never heard of Kenneth Starr (sp?). Was getting knob in the oval office worth the taxpayers money spent by Starr to impeach Clinton? No. The right was looking for ANY excuse to go after him. Funny how the right attacks Fitzgerald over the Plame case, saying that it's a waste of taxpayers $$, never mind the fact that ashcroft assigned him to the case, and that what Clinton did was worse.
Lack of character? You mean the 'do as we say, not as we do' administration? I thought bush was going to bring integrity back to the white house? It's been one bumble after another and righties are starting to fall (the Plame case, the Abramoff case).

Anyone who actually says "Bush lied, people died" has absolutely no historical knowledge of the events of the past 15 years nor the prevailing opinion of overyone, foreign and domestic, leading up to the war. That's just some stinking hippy catch phrase that means nothing more than the person saying it gets their world view from the likes of Michael Moore.


I hope you are not trying to say that I have ever said that. If so, I DEFY you to find it.
You claim to not be an echo chamber for all things right, but labelling people on the left as communists, hippies and Michael Moore followers, sure helps you make your point.

14:24  
Blogger Dorman said...

Stay on target here folks.

My statement about the enemy being a ghost is meant to provoke thought, not disbelieve someone may be trying to kill me on my CLP. The people are real, the organization is illusionary as I will explore in part 3.

Stay on target because we have some great minds paying attention and participating in this debate. Let's not waste it.

14:44  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Dorman said that it's just hadji killing hadji, I say it's bigger than that. I don't call that disagreeing with his take on the war or how things are being handled, or not handled as you would have it. That's a pretty big jump from this to you saying I've got a lot of nerve to disagree with someone on the ground. I think if Dorman weighed in on this he would agree with me and I think you would find that Dorman and I probably agree on almost everything that I'm qualified to comment on. He's on the ground, I'm not, so I wouldn't dare question what he sees and experiences.

Tell me exactly where I brought up Fitzgerald? Ever. Tell me where anyone has brought up Fitzgerald. The right hasn't made him into the left's new Ken Starr, so don't try to make it sound like they did. He investigated a crime that wasn't committed, fine, the courts will decide, just as they did with Clinton. When it's all said and done I think and hope we'll find Joe Wilson looking more idiotic than the right. Time will tell.

As for Bush lied people died, I will never back down from my assessment of the type of people that say that, their knowledge of the prewar intelligence and especially and commentary of their very own political party. I've believe my stereotype of them is exact in their outlook, intelligence of lack thereof and their frothing hatred for Bush.

14:46  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

The organization is islam itself, it's very real, and it's fingers are far into the fabric of our society with tacit approval from numerous levels of municipal and civic leadership.

14:48  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

The right hasn't made him into the left's new Ken Starr, so don't try to make it sound like they did. He investigated a crime that wasn't committed, fine, the courts will decide, just as they did with Clinton. When it's all said and done I think and hope we'll find Joe Wilson looking more idiotic than the right.

Oh please. The right is attacking Fitzgerald and claiming he is a lapdog for dems.

Perjury isn't a crime? Libby may not have been indicted for outing plame, but like Fitzgerald said, he's not done yet .

15:01  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

That's not what I meant, and you know it. There was no crime in outing a covert CIA agent who wasn't covert in the first place. Clear enough for you?

15:15  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

Prove she wasn't covert.
Fitzgerald apparently thinks so.
Page 5, item 9 of the Libby indictment:
On or about June 12, 2003, LIBBY was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the Central Intelligence Agency in the Counterproliferation Division. LIBBY understood tha tteh Vice President had learned this information from the CIA.

The Counterproliferation Division is a part of the Clandestine Department at the CIA.

All I have ever seen is blogs and statements from non-government people that she wasn't covert. Unless you provide me with something to the contrary, you are just regurgitation the propaganda fed to the right by the rnc.

I will now try to stay on topic, whatever the hell that is. Sorry, Dean.

15:31  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

On that note, and I'd like a serious answer without any glib little statements, do you think it is okay for Joe Wilson to misrepresent the reason for his trip, who recommended him for it and what he found when he was there to the NYT is an obviously partisan op-ed and continue to lie about to any media outlets that would listen?

We now know that the VP's office didn't request he go, as he stated, we know that his wife recomended that he go (he lied about that too) and we know that what he found actually strengthened the CIA's case that Iraq was trying to obtain weapons material. This is all per the US Senate's Prewar Intelligence Report and two British government reports. We also know he lied to the Washington Post when he said that a CIA document detailing the Niger connection was a forgery, because it was discovered that he never even saw it and it didn't exist when he was in Niger.

Should the Bush admin sit back and let Wilson continue to lie about most aspects of his trip and what he found, or should they have done something to directly counter his claims? I'm not asking you to advocate a strategy, just yes or no or maybe. Would you hold the CIA or the State Department accountable for letting someone do what he did as a representative of either agency?

I don't expect you to believe me, so the read the report for yourself here: http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf

If you are the President or his aides and you know this guy is lying to back you, what would you do?

15:35  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

If you are the President or his aides and you know this guy is lying to back you, what would you do?


I don't know. Maybe get back at him by outing his wife?

15:45  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

http://www.slate.com/id/2089249/

This article sums up pretty nicely my feelings on the matter (which will obviously not be yours). Whether or not releasing her name as payback was right (I would say that with the exception of her husband lying repeatedly to the public about the whole thing, it's never, ever, ever right) it's a far cry from obviously illegal. Decide for yourself.

15:56  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Seriously Robert, you have a situation where you know the guy is lying his ass off and doing so in a partisan manner to trash the President and that his "covert" wife is an accessory to the whole thing, what protection should she expect. If you are a covert agent, would you ever recommend a family member for anything relating to your work. Would you donate to Al Gore using your real name and the name of your CIA front company? Would you do an article for vantiy fair or plaster your name in Who's Who in America? I think the media is looking so desperately for flair and drama that they created a covert agent that was far from covert herself. Kind of reminds me of the whole Jessica Lynch story.

16:02  
Blogger Dorman said...

Jessica Lynch was a PoS. But anyway, I must say that I am proud to have the most well informed and erudite commentors on my blog :) That is why I do what I do.

Bob, the original topic was How you all have been deceived about base closings, troop levels, and the veracity and applicability of an Exit Plan. Bill W helped illuminate the Exit Plan, which is the meat of Part 2 that I am currently writing.

The rhetorical question at the end gives some inclination to what I am also trying to lead the reader to. What about Afghanistan? remember, apples to apples.

16:11  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

Her CIA front company was exposed thanks to Novak's column.
She appeared in Vanity Fair, after Novak's column.

Your slate article is nothing I have already read. Unfortunately for the right, as I posted on here earlier, Fitzgerald evidently isn't done yet. The boisterous chest-thumping by the right may have been premature.

16:13  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Her CIA front company is listed in the public records as her employer for a $1,000 donation to Al Gore in 2000.

I'm not going to start a new tangent argument over this, she was politically active, being seen with her husband at several democratic political functions, prior to Bob Novak. I've got a picture of covert in my mind, and she ain't it.

And if more people get indicted, so be it. I really could care less. You can't bitch about Clinton lying to the grand jury and then do the same thing yourself.

16:22  
Blogger Robert Chase said...

You can't bitch about Clinton lying to the grand jury and then do the same thing yourself.


Not sure what you mean by this.
SO she's at democratic political functions. So what? I have been invited to democratic political functions and I am not what you call anyone with any politial pull.

Also please provide the name for Plame's front company, so I can look up the Gore donation claim for myself. The article I read regarding the front being blown as a result of novak's article wasn't named.

16:32  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Brewster-Jennings & Associates - 1999. I believe using your front company's name as a CIA agent for stuff like that is against their regulations.

My point was directed at Rove, or whoever else may have lied to the grand jury. Lying is lying, regardless of party, and after all the Clinton bullshit they should have known better than to do it themselves.

As for the political functions, what I mean is she was obviously a public person for a line of work that I don't think would call for overt publicity. That's just one guys opinion of staying secret.

16:41  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Dorman,

Can you be a little more obvious out where you're going with the Afghan stuff?

How to do it with less troops by using the becoming the local resistance's force multiplier? Where are you going here?

I mean, the mission is different, the populace is different, and the surroundings are obviously different. As for the people that don't want us there, we're just another bad guy with tanks.

Help me, I've been debating with RC so long I forgot where we started.

16:44  
Blogger Dorman said...

The mission is the same - to oust a government and install a new democratic one. The populace is similar - poor muslims in arid lands albeit the Afghanies are mountain people. The environment only differs in that Iraq is mostly flat. Main export of Iraq = Oil, Afghanistan = Opium.

My point is this, we did the exact same thing in Afghanistan quicker, simpler, and quieter than we are doing in Iraq...with exponentially LESS troops. Sure the population is lower but not proportional to the number of troops there. They even use the same weapons against us as Iraq does. Afghanistan gets no coverage any more ostensibly, yet there are still deaths.

And has the CIA taken the opportunity to take a huge chunk out of the drug trade and the worldwide war on drugs? No, instead of destroying the fields that provide the world with 80% of its opium, they have decided to "control" it. The lame excuse is they don't want to damage the local economy. Really. Look it up.

Afghanistan was run fairly well. Iraq is a mire of mismanagement and deception. We are in Afghanistan, again ostensibly to hunt for bin Laden. The administration is hard pressed for a viable legitimate excuse for Iraq, thus all the debate and dissent.

17:26  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

I don't think you can compare ruling government in Afghanistan to Iraq. Very different situation, with the opposition in Afghanistan being on the ground fighting the Taliban for years versus some opposition group living in London wearing 5K suits. I don't think that's apples to apples at all.

We also didn't sell out the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan once before, causing several thousand of them to be slaughtered and greatly reducing our credibility.

20:00  
Blogger Dorman said...

I'll give you that Afghanistan had a head start on a replacement military and regime. But IMHO it should not have had that much effect on the time frame difference. Also on the coverage the media provides...they hardly have talked about it since we invaded Iraq except when Tillman died. And then the media was all too eager to announce he was killed by friendly fire. no honor in american media, even if it may be true.

20:39  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Well, I don't think it's any secret that good news for the military isn't typically the mainstream media covering.

Agree totally.

20:49  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

Curious, why do you think things are so different, differences taken into account?

In my opinion, the biggest difference is that the biggest supporter of the Taliban has had our gun to their head since 9-11 while Syria, Iran and the rest of the Sunni supporters still have a pretty free reign to supply the bad guys with martyrs, cash and weapons. We cut off the Paki spigot pretty decently but haven't come close to doing the same thing in Iraq.

I've also read some on the ground stories from our special forces guys that the Taliban weren't the most capable military force, although that may have been only situational specific. Being a zealot may get you far, but it won't stop bullets and bombs.

Finally, while the CIA has been in Afghanistan for years, I recently read that we had a total of four people in Iraq leading up to the invasion. That's not so good for intelligence, although all we really needed to do was detain George Galloway and torture him to find out what we needed.

20:56  
Blogger Dorman said...

Basically, I think the world eye was rightfully skeptical about the reasons we focused on Iraq. Afghanistan was obviously more justified although it is sketchy whether or not bin Laden ever was where we claim he is. I personally think he is in the US and has been. Or at least in Saudi.

09:40  
Blogger Jack Burton said...

I'm sorry, i'm going to assume the OBL in the US was a joke and not think of it again. Best just to move on from comments like that.

19:45  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home