Operation Swarmer is a ruse!

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: palehorse74
UPDATE (2:55 PM): To answer progdem's question -- the Joint Chiefs serve fixed, four-year terms. Shinseki was sworn in as Army chief in June of 1999 and retired in June of 2003. He served his full term.
end of story.
He was FIRED! He was pushed out you "KISS ASS SHILL"!
:laugh:
So was Gen. Shalikashvili.

Palehorse claims to be well-read but I think that's just another one of his own ruses.

WTF does Shalikashvili have to do with any of this? He retired in 1997.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: conjur
So was Gen. Shalikashvili.

Palehorse claims to be well-read but I think that's just another one of his own ruses.

yes, you caught me... it's all part of the great PNAC conspiracy to make you think I'm well read! Mr. Rove gave me the idea one day while we were at lunch discussing different ways to take over the world... it all starts here, on ATP&N! This site is the key to all of the things Mr. Rove and I have planned! muhahahaha...
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Just another in a long line of current and former Generals that were critical of the invasion of Iraq that were summarily ignored.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
Main Entry: 1 as·sault
Pronunciation: &-'solt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English assaut, from Old French, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin assaltus, from assalire
1 a :a violent physical or verbal attack b : a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces c : a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary)
2 a : a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact

To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....

After listening to several generals and military experts on the radio/TV, all claimed that the "massive air assualt" description is overblown, and the operation itself is not that different than a number of anti-insurgent operations that happen frequently.

IE, a lot of hype from the admin to try and restore some measure of public support for their war planning. And again, blowing up in their face as the obvious deception it is ( minus the dwindling die-hards, who could see a Bush lie if it blew up in their face like an IED.)
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: conjur
Just another in a long line of current and former Generals that were critical of the invasion of Iraq that were summarily ignored.

ignored? definately... but not fired! GG Ms. Pelosi!
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Hafen
Main Entry: 1 as·sault
Pronunciation: &-'solt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English assaut, from Old French, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin assaltus, from assalire
1 a :a violent physical or verbal attack b : a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces c : a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary)
2 a : a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact

To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....

After listening to several generals and military experts on the radio/TV, all claimed that the "massive air assualt" description is overblown, and the operation itself is not that different than a number of anti-insurgent operations that happen frequently.

IE, a lot of hype from the admin to try and restore some measure of public support for their war planning. And again, blowing up in their face as the obvious deception it is ( minus the dwindling die-hards, who could see a Bush lie if it blew up in their face like an IED.)

Hey genius, the term "Air Assault" is used by the military to refer to any/all missions involving the delivery of troops, and/or equipment, to a target location by helicopter. There is even an "Air Assault Badge" which is depicted with a helicopter in the center. Air Assault School is one of the many great schools available in the Army. (I enjoyed it 10 years ago!)

It wasn't the type of mission which was unique; rather, it was the scale, location, and make-up of the partipants which made it so. Air Assault missions themselves are run every day, just not with 1500 participants, 800 of which being foreign. The largest Air Assault mission that I've ever been a part of, in Afghanistan, involved only 170 troops.

Sooo, genius, are you honestly insinuating that Bush, or perhaps his administration, coined the term "Air Assault" themselves as some sort of marketing ploy for last week's mission!? Are you really that slowwwww?

lol...ya...you are. DUH!
 

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Just another in a long line of current and former Generals that were critical of the invasion of Iraq that were summarily ignored.

Yeah, he was one of a few who's opinions were voiced and not acted upon. Just because their opinion wasn't acted upon doesn't mean they were right or the others were wrong. HE wasn't in charge, his opinion was voiced - that's all that he could have done.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: conjur
Just another in a long line of current and former Generals that were critical of the invasion of Iraq that were summarily ignored.

Yeah, he was one of a few who's opinions were voiced and not acted upon. Just because their opinion wasn't acted upon doesn't mean they were right or the others were wrong. HE wasn't in charge, his opinion was voiced - that's all that he could have done.
Do you believe that Rummy's and Herr Wolfowitzes plan was the correct one?

 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Hafen
Main Entry: 1 as·sault
Pronunciation: &-'solt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English assaut, from Old French, from (assumed) Vulgar Latin assaltus, from assalire
1 a :a violent physical or verbal attack b : a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces c : a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary)
2 a : a threat or attempt to inflict offensive physical contact or bodily harm on a person (as by lifting a fist in a threatening manner) that puts the person in immediate danger of or in apprehension of such harm or contact

To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....

After listening to several generals and military experts on the radio/TV, all claimed that the "massive air assualt" description is overblown, and the operation itself is not that different than a number of anti-insurgent operations that happen frequently.

IE, a lot of hype from the admin to try and restore some measure of public support for their war planning. And again, blowing up in their face as the obvious deception it is ( minus the dwindling die-hards, who could see a Bush lie if it blew up in their face like an IED.)

Hey genius, the term "Air Assault" is used by the military to refer to any/all missions involving the delivery of troops to a target location by helicopter. There is even an "Air Assault Badge" which is depicted with a helicopter in the center. Air Assault School is one of the many great schools available in the Army. (I enjoyed it 10 years ago!)

It wasn't the type of mission which was unique; rather, it was the scale, location, and make-up of the partipants which made it so. ***And the level of political and media attention*** Air Assault missions themselves are run every day, just not with 1500 participants, 800 of which being foreign. The largest Air Assault mission that I've ever been a part of, in Afghanistan, involved only 170 troops.

Sooo, genius, are you honestly insinuating that Bush, or perhaps his administration, coined the term "Air Assault" themselves as some sort of marketing ploy for last week's mission!? Are you really that slowwwww?

lol...ya...you are. DUH!

Yes genius, Bush invented the word "air assault" as he has invented a number of unique quasi-english phrases. In fact our CIC and his revolutionary military thinking invented the tactic. His strategic brilliance is without question.

Or perhaps you intentionally play dense to skirt around the real issue. As one former commander compared the operation (paraphrased) "Like many of the helicopter operations in Vietnam, a large and impressive display of military hardware, but little in strategic value."

But go you can go believing this operation had a strategic value proportionate to its political advertisement.

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Hafen
Yes genius, Bush invented the word "air assault" as he has invented a number of unique quasi-english phrases.
I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic in the first sentence of your post there...

because your first post made it seem as though you thought the term itself was some sort of propoganda:
To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....
I could care less about the rest of your accusations here... my question is regarding the term "Air Assault" itself.

so, just so i'm clear here, once again, do you really think Bush or his administration coined the term "Air Assault" to specifically describe this week's mission?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Hafen
Yes genius, Bush invented the word "air assault" as he has invented a number of unique quasi-english phrases.
I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic in the first sentence of your post there...

because your first post made it seem as though you thought the term itself was some sort of propoganda:
To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....
I could care less about the rest of your accusations here... my question is regarding the term "Air Assault" itself.

so, just so i'm clear here, once again, do you really think Bush or his administration coined the term "Air Assault" to specifically describe this week's mission?
I think your meter must be broken. His main point is that this operation was more for show more than it being strategically important
 

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: conjur
Just another in a long line of current and former Generals that were critical of the invasion of Iraq that were summarily ignored.

Yeah, he was one of a few who's opinions were voiced and not acted upon. Just because their opinion wasn't acted upon doesn't mean they were right or the others were wrong. HE wasn't in charge, his opinion was voiced - that's all that he could have done.
Do you believe that Rummy's and Herr Wolfowitzes plan was the correct one?

Not particularly but then again neither you nor I are stategic planners nor are we in a position to make those decisions. Would I have done things differently? Sure. I think we should have been bombing the crap out of Saddam while we were wasting time at the UN.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Hafen
Yes genius, Bush invented the word "air assault" as he has invented a number of unique quasi-english phrases.
I really can't tell if you're being sarcastic in the first sentence of your post there...

because your first post made it seem as though you thought the term itself was some sort of propoganda:
To construe this operation as a massive air "assualt" is clearly deceptive, unless the army is referring not to a massive amount of ordinance dropped from the air (#=0), but rather a plethora of obsenities and insults to the insurgents below.

A large air "mobilization" or "air lift" operation would be more accurate, but doesn't really have that "feel-good, can-do" attitude to it. Why, we may actually start thinking the Admin is doing something....
I could care less about the rest of your accusations here... my question is regarding the term "Air Assault" itself.

so, just so i'm clear here, once again, do you really think Bush or his administration coined the term "Air Assault" to specifically describe this week's mission?
I think your meter must be broken. His main point is that this operation was more for show more than it being strategically important

and like I said, I could care less what his other point was, as it's all just more of the usual neolib exagerated nonsense conpiracy theory crap... i was only concerned with his possible ignorance of the term "Air Assault." After having someone else around here misinterpret it to mean "carpet bombing," I wouldnt be at all surprised to find someone here who thinks Bush and Co. made the term up... (and I bet some here STILL think he did so! lol...)
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,805
8,385
136
ok ok ok, i get now...

operation swarmer, utilizing the largest air assault assets since 'nam totally annihilated those forces opposing them and literally swept the ao clean of terrorists aligned with al qaeda. numerous weapons caches were confiscated.

many local tribesmen, weeping profusely with tears of joy, hailed president bush as their savior and vowed to convert to christianity.

although exact figures were not made available, the cost of the operation was considered minor compared to the lives and property saved from the numerous terrorists operating in the ao, and accuratly reflects the cost of the war in general.

the use of american-trained iraqi troops in this operation was touted as proof that the hero of iraq, donald rumsfeld was right about everything he said concerning the issues surrounding the iraqi military both pre and post-invasion.

as a coincidence, poll figures immediatly jumped in favor of pres. bush and his handling of the war.

*update*- reports have been confirmed that all the insurgents in the ao that were thought to have been eliminated or captured have returned to the area. the few local tribesmen that could be found in the area have sued the us gov't for frightening their goat herds into a state of shock where they can no longer provide milk. they denounced the troops involved in the operation as infidel demon-worshipers and traitors of islam. also, pres. bushs' poll numbers have dropped back down to pre-assault numbers.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
To Be Continued . .



Only Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff when President Bush was elected, had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans. So Mr. Rumsfeld retaliated by naming General Shinseki's successor more than a year before his scheduled retirement, effectively undercutting his authority. The rest of the senior brass got the message, and nobody has complained since.
 

ShadesOfGrey

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,523
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To Be Continued . .



Only Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff when President Bush was elected, had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans. So Mr. Rumsfeld retaliated by naming General Shinseki's successor more than a year before his scheduled retirement, effectively undercutting his authority. The rest of the senior brass got the message, and nobody has complained since.

I thought you said he was "fired"?
I thought Conjur said that a long line of Generals had opposed the war plan - why does the Time state - "Only Gen. Eric Shinseki ... had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans"

:confused:
:laugh: :laugh:
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,805
8,385
136
And yet just because you or others think they were wrong, doesn't automatically mean that you little hero Shinseki was right.
it strikes me rather odd that you seem to defend the military and the administration without fail, yet you insult the military and a retired army chief of staff by calling him 'little hero shinseki" only because he was true to himself and the branch of service he represents? do you have a personal dislike of the former army chief of staff that you would slap him down in such a manner? or was it just a bad choice of words typed in haste?

you have my deepest apologies if i misunderstood your intent or description of what i consider to be a true american hero, as all of our military service members are.
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To Be Continued . .



Only Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff when President Bush was elected, had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans. So Mr. Rumsfeld retaliated by naming General Shinseki's successor more than a year before his scheduled retirement, effectively undercutting his authority. The rest of the senior brass got the message, and nobody has complained since.

I thought you said he was "fired"?
I thought Conjur said that a long line of Generals had opposed the war plan - why does the Time state - "Only Gen. Eric Shinseki ... had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans"

:confused:
:laugh: :laugh:

Look at the supporter of the failed administration laugh. Very funny indeed. Lots of dead solders and civilians for no reason. And now the U.S. is in far more weakened state and in far greater danger. Very funny. Laugh it up.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey


I thought you said he was "fired"?
I thought Conjur said that a long line of Generals had opposed the war plan - why does the Time state - "Only Gen. Eric Shinseki ... had the courage to challenge the downsizing plans"

:confused:
:laugh: :laugh:

What a partisan puke you are, playing with the semantics of the wording.
He was fired in place - and left there, like a 'head on a pike' as a warning to those who might still dissagre.
He was left in a position without authority - since his successor was named a year in advance
and effectively had no authority in his posiotin. A man who had dedicated his entire career to the Army
was overruled by a fool who had technically deserted his military comitment and hide behind his daddies power,
and Rumsfeld, a second level instructor in a Navy training facillity gets his way by browbeating
those who actually are military experts, because it's not what he want's to hear.

Be proud of yourself SOG, you cowardly bastard, hide behind your little playing with the technical wording
even though it is clear to everyone what the hell is wrong with this tin-ear administration.
Just ride your little pale donkey up that mountain, belittle anyone who has the intelligence to point out what's wrong.
Snicker in the closet about how clever you are at interpreting the partisan drivel that you subscribe to, shill.
Laugh about how many American soldiers are killed and maimed while you stroke your pathetic ego.






 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
The only thing more disgraceful then this administration are the people who still blindly support it.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
The only thing more disgraceful then this administration are the people who still blindly support it.

...and the people who blindly oppose it as well.
 

smashp

Platinum Member
Aug 30, 2003
2,443
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
The only thing more disgraceful then this administration are the people who still blindly support it.

...and the people who blindly oppose it as well.

no, most people oppose the current admin do so because they opened their eyes. Something you couldnt understand.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: smashp
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
The only thing more disgraceful then this administration are the people who still blindly support it.

...and the people who blindly oppose it as well.

no, most people oppose the current admin do so because they opened their eyes. Something you couldnt understand.
keep thinking yourself "enlightened" while the bus passes you by... By "opened their eyes," I imagine you mean "clicked on moveon.org," or "tuned into CNN."

I, on the other hand, will be over here drawing my own conclusions based on real-world firsthand experience.

GL!
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: smashp
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
The only thing more disgraceful then this administration are the people who still blindly support it.

...and the people who blindly oppose it as well.

no, most people oppose the current admin do so because they opened their eyes. Something you couldnt understand.
keep thinking yourself "enlightened" while the bus passes you by... By "opened their eyes," I imagine you mean "clicked on moveon.org," or "tuned into CNN."

I, on the other hand, will be over here drawing my own conclusions based on real-world firsthand experience.

GL!



In other words what you see behind you partisan blinders screw what anyone else says, yep..typical behavior from you, you are not special..matter of fact your opinion means almost nothing here.

Put up or dont waste peoples time already.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Steeplerot
In other words what you see behind you partisan blinders screw what anyone else says, yep..typical behavior from you, you are not special..matter of fact your opinion means almost nothing here.

Put up or dont waste peoples time already.

HOLY FORUM STALKERS BATMAN!

does anyone's opinion here really mean anything?