Gen. David Petraeus says the burning of Koran would ...

[jpeyton]

He caved-in and cancelled; just what I expected from a spineless God-fearing conservative.

 

[Rainsford]

Are you suggesting that unless Obama and Co. come out against this proposed burning, the entire country will suddenly join in?

They can ignore it, which is what I think the proper thing should be to do.
Or they can speak against it without projecting fear of repercussions.

I mean that if people are burning Korans with a lot of publicity attached, and the President doesn't say anything, it looks like he's implicitly supporting it. Which is unfortunate, but in our society our elected officials are pretty much forced to comment on everything, because people expect them to and draw all sorts of conclusions when they don't. Especially when people with no official responsibility like Sarah Palin can't STOP commenting on everything.

 

[Rainsford]

That's what people were saying about the mosque.
...

Which does not make the two situations the same...

 

[Infohawk]

He caved-in and cancelled; just what I expected from a spineless God-fearing conservative.

I thought generalizing was bad? Oh never mind you're too spineless to ever respond to a post... you just come in and shit in threads and run.

 

[Infohawk]

LOL... how does it fit my politics? I stated in another thread that I hoped the Pastor exercised his 1st Amendment right. So how does that support my politics?

I'm saying you like the general's message in this case so you are looking past the fact that a general is interfering with civilian life. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you think it's a pretty good idea that generals shut the fuck up about what civilians do?

 

[Fern]

I'm saying you like the general's message in this case so you are looking past the fact that a general is interfering with civilian life. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you think it's a pretty good idea that generals shut the fuck up about what civilians do?

Generally I do.

But I think the general's motive might be different than what many here seem to think.

Patraeus' M.O. or counter-insurgency tactic is having his troops work closely with the local leaders. Without their (locals) support his method isn't going to be successful.

I suspect his condemnation of this was more for local (Muslim) consumption than anything else. Having the military condemn burning Korans likely makes it easier for the locals to accept working with them.

I highly doubt he thought the local pastor was gonna drop it because he said he should.

Fern

 

[Throckmorton]

Apparently the concept of "hearts and minds" is lost on quite a few people

 

[Infohawk]

Apparently the concept of "hearts and minds" is lost on quite a few people

And apparently you're forgetting that "hearts and minds" was neoconservative propoganda campaign designed to get Iraqis to accept an illegal and absurd invasion. And now you're lapping it up?

 

[Infohawk]

Which does not make the two situations the same...

Of course not, because when Muslims are offended the world stops turning and everyone including the president has to act like Islam is a legitimate belief system worthy of respect. But when the majority of Americans are offended they are just bigoted.

 

[Throckmorton]

And apparently you're forgetting that "hearts and minds" was neoconservative propoganda campaign designed to get Iraqis to accept an illegal and absurd invasion. And now you're lapping it up?

"COIN" is the only strategy that makes sense. There's nothing exotic about winning hearts and minds and drinking 3 cups of tea. It's common sense

 

[Infohawk]

"COIN" is the only strategy that makes sense. There's nothing exotic about winning hearts and minds and drinking 3 cups of tea. It's common sense

It's not exotic.. it's just naive and neoconservative.

 

[her209]

Generally I do.

But I think the general's motive might be different than what many here seem to think.

Patraeus' M.O. or counter-insurgency tactic is having his troops work closely with the local leaders. Without their (locals) support his method isn't going to be successful.

I suspect his condemnation of this was more for local (Muslim) consumption than anything else. Having the military condemn burning Korans likely makes it easier for the locals to accept working with them.

I highly doubt he thought the local pastor was gonna drop it because he said he should.

Fern

Pretty much this.

Without the support of the locals, the job of securing and defeating the Muslim extremists is going to be that much harder.

 

[0roo0roo]

Its amazing the pc bullsh*t going on all over now.
Don't upset the religion of peace,lest they kill u

don't like fundies, but its sad it took one to reveal the simple facts.

 

[woolfe9999]

And apparently you're forgetting that "hearts and minds" was neoconservative propoganda campaign designed to get Iraqis to accept an illegal and absurd invasion. And now you're lapping it up?

Hearts and minds predates the Bush administration. The trouble was the Bush admin. didn't practice it well at all in Iraq for the first several years, which is why the occupation was a miserable failure.

- wolf

 

[her209]

Of course not, because when Muslims are offended the world stops turning and everyone including the president has to act like Islam is a legitimate belief system worthy of respect. But when the majority of Americans are offended they are just bigoted.

Muslims building a mosque because *ZOMG* they want a place to worship.

Christians burning a Quran because...?

 

[Infohawk]

Pretty much this.

Without the support of the locals, the job of securing and defeating the Muslim extremists is going to be that much harder.

LOL. So basically you don't support military commentary on civilian life unless the motivations are correct? So basically what I was saying was right. It depends on whether you like the message or not.

How about this? The military should shut the fuck up about civilian life?

 

[Throckmorton]

It's not exotic.. it's just naive and neoconservative.

Oh really? So what's your strategy for Afghanistan and Iraq? Kill 'em all?

 

[0roo0roo]

He caved-in and cancelled; just what I expected from a spineless God-fearing conservative.

really, the spineless one would be someone who was too scared to say the truth, and many on the left also parrot this "religion of peace" nonsense. Whos to blame? the pastor? or the f%@# religion that is so f%@# up that people are so scared of it that they spend their time making excuses for it instead of pointing the finger where it belongs. Its sad it took some nut pastor to help make it clear how bs the regular apologist position on islam really is. imagine if people were so afraid to criticise or offend christianity and the left spent their time defending that insanity. don't talk about spineless...the left got totally spineless on this issue long ago. and now we are backed into a corner where both sides are spewing apologist bullsh*t and enabling the worst in islam. its like saying don't offend the murdering rapist by stating the blatant truth, he might rape us. %@# u, the problems not with us, its with the murdering rapist.

 

[Throckmorton]

LOL. So basically you don't support military commentary on civilian life unless the motivations are correct? So basically what I was saying was right. It depends on whether you like the message or not.

How about this? The military should shut the fuck up about civilian life?

Creating an international PR disaster with the entire Muslim population of the world isn't exactly what I consider "civilian life"

 

[Infohawk]

Oh really? So what's your strategy for Afghanistan and Iraq? Kill 'em all?

Iraq: either UN involvement or leave it alone at this point. Complete withdrawal.

Afghanistan: no nation-building. Limited presence to conduct air strikes and special operations against Taliban.

 

[Infohawk]

Creating an international PR disaster with the entire Muslim population of the world isn't exactly what I consider "civilian life"

Your definition of civilian life is absurd. Happenings on private property in the US is civilian life by definition.

 

[Throckmorton]

Your definition of civilian life is absurd. Happenings on private property in the US is civilian life by definition.

But it's not solely restricted to "civilian life". It directly affects the war effort.

 

[Throckmorton]

Iraq: either UN involvement or leave it alone at this point. Complete withdrawal.

Afghanistan: no nation-building. Limited presence to conduct air strikes and special operations against Taliban.

Typical attitude of the far left and libertarian fringe-- Fuck 'em, 'cause they ain't us

 

[Infohawk]

But it's not solely restricted to "civilian life". It directly affects the war effort.

Wow you're a full blown 2003 neoconservative now. Support our troops or else!

Sorry, it's legal action on private property in the USA. End of story. There were claims that anti-war protestors were giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Would you have liked it if a general had come out and said as much? Or maybe I've been misreading you and you really have been a neocon this whole time.

 

[Infohawk]

Typical attitude of the far left and libertarian fringe-- Fuck 'em, 'cause they ain't us

I didn't say anything of the sort. Any other quips I can deny for you?