Operation Yellow Elephant

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
An aggravating factor for a lot of chickenhawks is their attitude. Recently we had a pro-war poster someone calling another poster a coward based on his thoughts alone. If you talk the talk, walk the walk. Or maybe better for this context, "put up or shup." That is what sparks this sort of stuff. If you are going to berate everyone and prance around with a plastic flag and cheap patriotism, you have to expect people are going to call you on the fact you are just a bunch of hot air.

At least in Maluckeys case he actually did "Put Up":thumbsup:

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: charrison

The only problem is our armed forces are not in dire need.

Ok, if you say so...

Did we not go to war with Iraq because Saddam could strike us at anytime? Does that not count as a dire need ?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: outriding

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: charrison

The only problem is our armed forces are not in dire need.

Ok, if you say so...

Did we not go to war with Iraq because Saddam could strike us at anytime? Does that not count as a dire need ?

Strike us with *what*? A really mean-spirited memo?

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: outriding

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: charrison

The only problem is our armed forces are not in dire need.

Ok, if you say so...

Did we not go to war with Iraq because Saddam could strike us at anytime? Does that not count as a dire need ?

Strike us with *what*? A really mean-spirited memo?

I thought he was going to kick some sand in our general direction.

But Bush and Blair told us something else.

 

[maluckey]

As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

Remember when 2 planes crashed into the World Trade center?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
wasn't it stated that actual enrollment was up only because the target quotas were dropped?? and even if they are up now, they were down for a long enough time for a person to enlist, and complete basic training and be deployed!

You're right. They kept lowering the quotas (even June's was lowered) to the point where they could state "We beat our quota. Recruitment is on the rise!". Too bad that even though they beat their quota for June, they still didn't beat May's quota. And May's didn't beat April and so on.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

Remember when 2 planes crashed into the World Trade center?

What did SH have to do with 9/11? Oh yeah, NOTHING.

 

[Moonbeam]

Trust me, if we succeed in pouring our economy down the toilet on countering the fear of terrorism and the New World Order and there are no jobs to find, we will see the Republican boys demanding officer positions in the military as a birth right.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

So the "opposition" kicked off this campaign?

Would that be the folks from Operation Jackass?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

Remember when 2 planes crashed into the World Trade center?

Yep and I fully supported the action taken against Al Qaeda and the Taliban because they were responsible for it. It's a shame that the Dub and his handlers used that tragedy to get us involved in an ill conceived and ill advised war with a country that had nothing to do with it and was not even remotely a credible threat to us.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

Remember when 2 planes crashed into the World Trade center?

Yep and I fully supported the action taken against Al Qaeda and the Taliban because they were responsible for it. It's a shame that the Dub and his handlers used that tragedy to get us involved in an ill conceived and ill advised war with a country that had nothing to do with it and was not even remotely a credible threat to us.

Exactly.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$

Originally posted by: Crimson
This argument gets so old.. I'm not a fireman, but I expect them to come into my burning house to save me. I'm not a cop but I expect them to respond to an intruder in my house.. I'm not a high-voltage power line worker, but I expect them to repair the downed power line..

I'm not in the military, but I expect them to follow their orders when the President gives them..

People support their communities in different ways.. some people go to war for it, some people rush into burning buildings for it, some people fight criminals for it.. Other people, like trash collectors, pick up the trash for all of the above people, which prevents disease.. The power worker allows electricity to be available to all the above people which keeps people alive in hospitals, people cool, computers running, contruction workers build houses and roads which keep people safe. Defense workers design new weapons and armor which keep our soldiers alive.. gun companies make better weapons which allow our soldiers to kill the enemy before they kill them. Computer nerds come up with targeting software which allows our troops to defend themselves better.. Bank workers transfer money directly in the soldiers accounts which thier family can access and use.. farmers grow the crops soldiers families need to live..

Everyone does their part.. Are you saying the farmer can't support the war without serving in it? Then who will grow the food? Only the farmers which DON'T support the war? LOL.. lets hope the war doesn't get too popular or we will all be starving!

i'm saying that if there was a dire need for a certain position, how can you say you support that position if youre not willing to do it if you're able bodied???

if there were no firemen, wouldn't you join the voulnteer fire company? if there were no policemen and people were experiencing unheard of crime rates, wouldn't you dawn the badge and try to get things back to normal?


i have already made a decision that if they decide to bring back the draft, i will pre-emptively join either the air force, marine corp, or army, and i'm completely against hte war in iraq, however i feel that since we are there now, we better do a damned good job over there!

Ok.. what if there WAS a dire need for firemen.. and someone decided NOT to become one.. should the existing firemen NOT go put out their house if its on fire? What if there was a fire need for policemen.. and someone decided not to join.. Should the police ignore a hostage situation at their house?

And how about a more REALISTIC comparison.. what if there is a shortage of doctors or nurses at your local hospital.. and you decide NOT to become a doctor or a nurse.. If you have a heart attack should the existing doctors NOT treat you? The beauty of THAT comparison is that there actually IS a shortage of doctors and nurses in many communities.. as opposed to a shortage of troops.. Either way, regardless if you want to claim there IS a shortage of troops, the above examples prove why the argument is patently absurd.

How about this.. Should only the people who support the war gain the BENEFITS of such said war? Its great to say you oppose it.. But if the war in Iraq results in a more stable and friendly Middle East, should those who opposed it be allowed to benefit from that? Maybe all the Gitmo prisoners should then be moved into the neighborhoods of those who opposed the war?

I'm sure a lot of people opposed us getting involved in World War II as well.. Should the people who opposed it not be allowed to travel to Japan, German, Italy etc? Lets take that argument its conclusion.. should those who didn't fight for the Union, or whose families did not fight for the union in the past, be allowed to be American citizens, or should we kick everyone out of the United States whose family opposed the Union in the Civil war?

How about this.. If you didn't fight in the first Gulf War, should you be allowed to purchase gasoline that comes from oil from Kuwait or Saudi Arabia? After all, if you didn't serve why should you be allowed to use something you didn't support?

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

The world changed on 9/11.. But I wouldn't expect someone who is still bitter and angry about McCain losing like 5 years later to understand that.. Maybe if McCain was President he would have responded in a way equally as successful as his campaign finance reform.. Oops, if that were the case Saddam would be President of the United States.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

The world changed on 9/11.. But I wouldn't expect someone who is still bitter and angry about McCain losing like 5 years later to understand that.. Maybe if McCain was President he would have responded in a way equally as successful as his campaign finance reform.. Oops, if that were the case Saddam would be President of the United States.

LOL, what was the purpose of posting that nonsense, to get a dig at me?:laugh::roll:

 

[Moonbeam]

Man, when there was a draft the Hippies that avoided it were scum, but now that the privileged don't go why it's a different matter.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

Remember when 2 planes crashed into the World Trade center?

Yep and I fully supported the action taken against Al Qaeda and the Taliban because they were responsible for it. It's a shame that the Dub and his handlers used that tragedy to get us involved in an ill conceived and ill advised war with a country that had nothing to do with it and was not even remotely a credible threat to us.

Was Iraq a credible threat to Kuwait? How about Saudi Arabia? Iran? Would it be a good thing for the United States if he would have attacked one of those countries? AGAIN? Would a major war in the Middle East have harmed the United States? What about if Saddam would have attacked Israel, would that have been a good thing for us? How about the pilots that were routinely shot at by Saddam patrolling the no-fly zone over Iraq.. You want to tell them that Saddam was not a threat?

Was Kosovo a credible threat to the United States? How about Somalia? How about Germany in World War II for that matter.. were they really a threat to US? I doubt it.. Threats involve more than just a direct land invasion of the United States.. it can be economic, military, threats to our allies, threats to our national security.. etc..

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

The world changed on 9/11.. But I wouldn't expect someone who is still bitter and angry about McCain losing like 5 years later to understand that.. Maybe if McCain was President he would have responded in a way equally as successful as his campaign finance reform.. Oops, if that were the case Saddam would be President of the United States.

LOL, what was the purpose of posting that nonsense, to get a dig at me?:laugh::roll:

Yes.. I like taking digs at you because you are so bitter against GWB.. and I think most of it stems from what happened in the 2000 Presidential Primaries.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

The world changed on 9/11.. But I wouldn't expect someone who is still bitter and angry about McCain losing like 5 years later to understand that.. Maybe if McCain was President he would have responded in a way equally as successful as his campaign finance reform.. Oops, if that were the case Saddam would be President of the United States.

LOL, what was the purpose of posting that nonsense, to get a dig at me?:laugh::roll:

Yes.. I like taking digs at you because you are so bitter against GWB.. and I think most of it stems from what happened in the 2000 Presidential Primaries.

Well if you think that then feel free to mention it every time you reply to any of my posts, I don't mind.:laugh:

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Man, when there was a draft the Hippies that avoided it were scum, but now that the privileged don't go why it's a different matter.

(psst.. there's not a draft going on right now..)

And trust me, if there was a draft, I'd probably treat all the draft dodgers who fled the country as scum as well.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Man, when there was a draft the Hippies that avoided it were scum, but now that the privileged don't go why it's a different matter.

(psst.. there's not a draft going on right now..)

And trust me, if there was a draft, I'd probably treat all the draft dodgers who fled the country as scum as well.

I wouldn't fight if I didn't believe in the cause. The US military is no longer a defensive tool as it was intended, I have no issues "defending" my country, but attacking another...i'd have a moral delemma.

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: maluckey
As far as Iraq/Saddam, it all goes back to the fact that we cannot allow every two-bit thug out on parole to do as he pleeases. If every hardened criminal could do as he pleased, then the world would be like it OOOP!!! IS NOW!!!

When sex offenders get out and avoid the system and violate parole there are screams from everyone. Saddam was out on parole, was a murderer and then violated his parole numerous times. We nicely asked him to comply with parole or step aside and he did not. We took out the trash, just as we are doing with convicts in the United States at the moment. Laws are being passed in many states to slam parole violators with severe sentences.

Victims are not complaining about these tougher laws except for the length of time it took to realize that ignoring violators only encourages them and their ilk to do it again.

Remember this from the Dub in the 2000 Presidential campaign "America will not be the world's policeman"?

The world changed on 9/11.. But I wouldn't expect someone who is still bitter and angry about McCain losing like 5 years later to understand that.. Maybe if McCain was President he would have responded in a way equally as successful as his campaign finance reform.. Oops, if that were the case Saddam would be President of the United States.

The world did not change. It was the same as it was before. Remember the first WTC bombing?

The only thing that changed was the proganda that was shoved down our throats to make it look like that if we do not strike first we will die and loose our freedom. Does anyone feel safer? Not me. That is what has changed. Nothing else.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Man, when there was a draft the Hippies that avoided it were scum, but now that the privileged don't go why it's a different matter.

(psst.. there's not a draft going on right now..)

And trust me, if there was a draft, I'd probably treat all the draft dodgers who fled the country as scum as well.

I wouldn't fight if I didn't believe in the cause. The US military is no longer a defensive tool as it was intended, I have no issues "defending" my country, but attacking another...i'd have a moral delemma.

Hmm.. I guess I can see that. If there was a future push to take more offensive actions and a draft was enacted, the actions of dodgers could be understood.

But at the same time, we, as a country, went to war. We had huge support from Congress and US citizens. Just because things are not going as planned, however, is no reason to suddenly "jump ship" and refuse to go if needed.

If one of my kids was arrested for doing something stupid, I'd still go bail him out, despite not "supporting" his actions. But if he did it repeatedly, yeah, I'd be less inclinded to bail him out after the 3rd or 4th time..

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: Crimson
This argument gets so old.. I'm not a fireman, but I expect them to come into my burning house to save me. I'm not a cop but I expect them to respond to an intruder in my house.. I'm not a high-voltage power line worker, but I expect them to repair the downed power line..

I'm not in the military, but I expect them to follow their orders when the President gives them..

People support their communities in different ways.. some people go to war for it, some people rush into burning buildings for it, some people fight criminals for it.. Other people, like trash collectors, pick up the trash for all of the above people, which prevents disease.. The power worker allows electricity to be available to all the above people which keeps people alive in hospitals, people cool, computers running, contruction workers build houses and roads which keep people safe. Defense workers design new weapons and armor which keep our soldiers alive.. gun companies make better weapons which allow our soldiers to kill the enemy before they kill them. Computer nerds come up with targeting software which allows our troops to defend themselves better.. Bank workers transfer money directly in the soldiers accounts which thier family can access and use.. farmers grow the crops soldiers families need to live..

Everyone does their part.. Are you saying the farmer can't support the war without serving in it? Then who will grow the food? Only the farmers which DON'T support the war? LOL.. lets hope the war doesn't get too popular or we will all be starving!

Sorry you feal that way but the police have no constitutional requirement to protect you.

You could relate that point to the fact that one needs to look out for himself and his family (assuming males here). This is why we have the right to bear arms, for protection of ones property. Further stretching this argument you could apply it to the Young Republicans. The idea to "sign up or shut up" is a valid point, irregardless of the idea it presents, because when there is a dire need for new bodies in the millitary these people are playing arm-chair politics. A certain sect proclaims that they support a certain position 100% yet are passive when it comes to the idea of committing themselves to the cause that they are so needed? Is this logical? How can one proclaim to be "all for" something yet be passive to that something ... isn't it just a contradiction?