USS Cole suspect killed in US airstrike.

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Cool. Kudos to the military and kudos to Obama, he's been great on the War on Terror.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
Cool. Kudos to the military and kudos to Obama, he's been great on the War on Terror.

I also applaud Obama on this missile strike on a civilian in a foreign country. He has my support to kill as many of these fucking terrorists as he can.

You think we're going to get a craig234 diatribe of international law and tribunals now? Nah, I don't think so either.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Yea....Obama and Congress are doing wonders for the war on terror and the United States military....not in the big picture. As our military is basically gutted (it really is now) and our country is vulnerable as hell then he'll continue a parallel effort to go after veterans benefits (which he openly advocates) and ensure the remaining half of a half size military has no morale or any reason to make the military a career.

I don't think the average American even understands how gutted we are about to be in terms of our national defense and DOD capabilities as a whole. We aren't trying to be a world power any more we're trying to be partners. Even then we aren't going to be able to follow through with our agreements to our allies.

"Partners" is code for outdated military, outdated spent equipment and really shitty morale for our troops. We're basically going the way of England...no offence to the English on here, but it's true.

Yea, I'm a veteran and if you think I'm full of shit ask the average soldier, airman, sailor or marine. They are living that dream right now and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. I work with the Air Force as a civilian now and I can't imagine how it could get much worse for manning and equipment shortages. Really, there is no more fat to be cut, no more bone to be had. As much as I can't stand the man Secratary of Defense Panetta would have the same to say and he has to Congress and the President since he's been in that position.

Obama and Congress as a whole are NOT doing a good job at actually supporting the military and it's basic function but is doing a great job of feeding the media all of the great successes killing a very small click of terrorists. BTW any president would do the same.

They are also doing a wonderful job of diminishing ever so slowly our basic civil liberties...indef detention, trespassers bill, FBI backdooring internet sites, and the latest from Obama...more gun control. Not a surprise as Obama has stated that the Constitution is not relevant these days with choice words.

No I'm not a nut holed up in a compound in Idaho. I've just never been so alarmed at the actions of one man in office my entire adult life. I'm not stating opinion, I'm stating facts in terms of military capabilities and rights being lost. All of this is happening right under the average Americans nose.

Rant over.
 
Last edited:

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
There are opportunity costs to starting unnecessary trillion dollar wars. We have been spending a lot of money on the military, it's just that instead of using that money to improve the military, we used it to fight a war we didn't need. Obama has at least focused our defense strategy to getting people who are actively working to kill Americans instead of going after imaginary WMDs.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
There are opportunity costs to starting unnecessary trillion dollar wars. We have been spending a lot of money on the military, it's just that instead of using that money to improve the military, we used it to fight a war we didn't need. Obama has at least focused our defense strategy to getting people who are actively working to kill Americans instead of going after imaginary WMDs.

I don't completely disagree; however, do you really think it's that simple?

Someone can blame Obama or Bush, blame it on whoever, but it's really not relevant to the current state of the military. Do I personally think Obama has an agenda...yes, but it's at the expense of our national security. Should we have been at war for 10 plus years? It really doesn't matter we were and are and the military is broken as a result.

It's already broke, now it may be broke beyond repair. Yea we spent a lot of $$ on the military but the DOD doesn't even create the largest bill for the budget...not even close. Losing our ability to wage war and defend our country is too high a cost to gamble with. That has been proven time and time again throughout our short history as a country.

Obama is no different than any past president in his ability to highlight accomplishments that supposedly he is responsible for...especially during an election year. He didn't pull the trigger. What he doesn't have is any real grasp at what the military requires to operate now or into the future. Don't believe me? Ask the Joint Chiefs what they feel. They've already shared their opinions to the limits that they morally/legally can as general officers.

I won't even begin to discuss his economic views...that's another discussion all together and I'm afraid history will be explaining those actions for years to come. I know he's not going to get the money he needs/desires from the DOD even if we were to eliminate the military services all together.

I suppose all the legislation supported and sometimes sponsored by him to diminish our basic rights as Americans is all undue controversy as well? He can say he is responsible for killing a terrorists or two. How will ALL of his actions now translate into this countries well being 10 years from now?
 
Last edited:

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Did Obama start the Yemen air strikes or bush?

Congrats for Obama for the kill, but like osama, all he did was keep the same policies as bush.

Eventually the needle in the haystack will be found.
 

Baked

Lifer
Dec 28, 2004
36,052
17
81
Did Obama start the Yemen air strikes or bush?

Congrats for Obama for the kill, but like osama, all he did was keep the same policies as bush.

Eventually the needle in the haystack will be found.

Did you just call Obama out on a ninja killing blow?
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,574
8,097
136
I don't completely disagree; however, do you really think it's that simple?

Someone can blame Obama or Bush, blame it on whoever, but it's really not relevant to the current state of the military. Do I personally think Obama has an agenda...yes, but it's at the expense of our national security. Should we have been at war for 10 plus years? It really doesn't matter we were and are and the military is broken as a result.

It's already broke, now it may be broke beyond repair. Yea we spent a lot of $$ on the military but the DOD doesn't even create the largest bill for the budget...not even close. Losing our ability to wage war and defend our country is too high a cost to gamble with. That has been proven time and time again throughout our short history as a country.

Obama is no different than any past president in his ability to highlight accomplishments that supposedly he is responsible for...especially during an election year. He didn't pull the trigger. What he doesn't have is any real grasp at what the military requires to operate now or into the future. Don't believe me? Ask the Joint Chiefs what they feel. They've already shared their opinions to the limits that they morally/legally can as general officers.

I won't even begin to discuss his economic views...that's another discussion all together and I'm afraid history will be explaining those actions for years to come. I know he's not going to get the money he needs/desires from the DOD even if we were to eliminate the military services all together.

I suppose all the legislation supported and sometimes sponsored by him to diminish our basic rights as Americans is all undue controversy as well? He can say he is responsible for killing a terrorists or two. How will ALL of his actions now translate into this countries well being 10 years from now?

I'm a retired veteran, having spent 26 years in service. And the conclusion I've come to is all you have to do is follow the money trail. Look at where the bulk of defense spending is going to. Dig around in that stratospheric realm and see how much corruption, duplicative waste and "unintended" cost overruns sap defense dollars away from the troops who actually fight, get maimed and/or die on the line.

Look at how many $billions got sucked right out of the defense budget from graft, kickbacks, cheating, overcharging, underservicing and obscene amounts of $$$ just simply disappearing into the quagmire of the fog of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Look at the obscene profits companies like Halliburton etc. made/is making from those wars.

As Senseamp mentioned, if it weren't for all the corrupt profiteering and waste that went on in our middle east adventures pre-Obama, our military would be in a much better condition than it is now. This factor can't just be brushed aside and dismissed because it doesn't fit neatly into your agenda.

I've overheard on occasion how much military resources get stolen, sold on the black market and then resold back to the military because of mysterious critical inventory shortages while serving in Vietnam. Iraq and Afghanistan can't be any different. There's many reasons why the military is suffering at the moment, but you have to agree that entering into a completely unnecessary years long war in Iraq has to be the main reason the military is in its present state of "un"-readiness.

Simply laying it all at Obama's feet in an attempt to denigrate him and his party is too simple a feat for all the wrong reasons IMO.
 
Last edited:

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
I'm a retired veteran, having spent 26 years in service. And the conclusion I've come to is all you have to do is follow the money trail. Look at where the bulk of defense spending is going to. Dig around in that stratospheric realm and see how much corruption, duplicative waste and "unintended" cost overruns sap defense dollars away from the troops who actually fight, get maimed and/or die on the line.

Look at how many $billions got sucked right out of the defense budget from graft, kickbacks, cheating, overcharging, underservicing and obscene amounts of $$$ just simply disappearing into the quagmire of the fog of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Look at the obscene profits companies like Halliburton etc. made/is making from those wars.

As Senseamp mentioned, if it weren't for all the corrupt profiteering and waste that went on in our middle east adventures pre-Obama, our military would be in a much better condition than it is now. This factor can't just be brushed aside and dismissed because it doesn't fit neatly into your agenda.

I've overheard on occasion how much military resources get stolen, sold on the black market and then resold back to the military because of mysterious critical inventory shortages while serving in Vietnam. Iraq and Afghanistan can't be any different. There's many reasons why the military is suffering at the moment, but you have to agree that entering into a completely unnecessary years long war in Iraq has to be the main reason the military is in its present state of "un"-readiness.

Simply laying it all at Obama's feet in an attempt to denigrate him and his party is too simple a feat for all the wrong reasons IMO.

I agree that the military isn't the most efficient machine in terms of money well spent but what federal entity is? There hasn't been a battle, war or contingency since the Battle of Lexington and Concord that has accurately accounted for the money spent in the ''fog of war" through poor records or corruption.

Laying it all on Obama's feet...well, I certainly can't lay it all at his feet that is true. The erosion of our military capabilities started well before his administration. Congress is obviously a big player as well. Whether it was the war in Iraq that was the prime reason behind the erosion is debatable but what I'm more concerned with is how the recovery is achieved or not achieved as is the current trend.

That said he has continued that trend with a passion and with some unique twists of his own that are really alarming. It's his particular enthusiasm for that effort that I find worrisome. What I can lay at his feet is his administration's record to date of comparing a soldier to a mail man in terms of the benefits that should be given, even though promised, for what most never have to experience. I can lay at his feet the constant drive to miraculously attempt to cure an ailing economy by raping the military of all of it's worth without the hope of ever repairing, modernizing or even staying sideways in the ability to just operate administratively let alone fight a major conflict.

In response to the money trail....the banks love him, as they really should. His economic agenda has put this country in more debt than the DOD or any war right or wrong ever has. Again, that's another topic altogether but history will and actually already has a place for his agenda regarding our economy.

And the last topic of which all should be concerned, especially those who swore to defend the Constitution, from enemies foreign and domestic is the rationalization of a number of contradictory bills supported by and sponsored by a man who signs into public law under the pretence that the Constitution isn't relevant in this day and age.

My agenda? I don't know if its an agenda more than a right. I'd like to be able to sleep at night knowing that my country is safe and will remain that way. I'd like to know that I can exercise and maintain my rights as an American citizen without being deemed a terrorist or threat. It's not so much about laying it on Obama, one man, as being concerned about the precedents being set by his policies/agendas now and into the future....IMO.
 
Last edited:

dwell

pics?
Oct 9, 1999
5,185
2
0
You got jihads, we got stealth drones with missiles. Fahd al-Quso = bloodpaste.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Yea....Obama and Congress are doing wonders for the war on terror and the United States military....not in the big picture. As our military is basically gutted (it really is now) and our country is vulnerable as hell then he'll continue a parallel effort to go after veterans benefits (which he openly advocates) and ensure the remaining half of a half size military has no morale or any reason to make the military a career.

I don't think the average American even understands how gutted we are about to be in terms of our national defense and DOD capabilities as a whole. We aren't trying to be a world power any more we're trying to be partners. Even then we aren't going to be able to follow through with our agreements to our allies.

"Partners" is code for outdated military, outdated spent equipment and really shitty morale for our troops. We're basically going the way of England...no offence to the English on here, but it's true.

Yea, I'm a veteran and if you think I'm full of shit ask the average soldier, airman, sailor or marine. They are living that dream right now and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. I work with the Air Force as a civilian now and I can't imagine how it could get much worse for manning and equipment shortages. Really, there is no more fat to be cut, no more bone to be had. As much as I can't stand the man Secratary of Defense Panetta would have the same to say and he has to Congress and the President since he's been in that position.

Obama and Congress as a whole are NOT doing a good job at actually supporting the military and it's basic function but is doing a great job of feeding the media all of the great successes killing a very small click of terrorists. BTW any president would do the same.

They are also doing a wonderful job of diminishing ever so slowly our basic civil liberties...indef detention, trespassers bill, FBI backdooring internet sites, and the latest from Obama...more gun control. Not a surprise as Obama has stated that the Constitution is not relevant these days with choice words.

No I'm not a nut holed up in a compound in Idaho. I've just never been so alarmed at the actions of one man in office my entire adult life. I'm not stating opinion, I'm stating facts in terms of military capabilities and rights being lost. All of this is happening right under the average Americans nose.

Rant over.

Rather than response to the rest of your post, I'm going to say that the fact that you are more ashamed of Obama than Bush completely discredits your opinions, IMO.

If I recommend a book to you to remind you of the horrific history of Bush, would you read it? What if I offer to buy it for you?

If you read it, then I'd ask you to comment again and be happy to consider your post.
 

Angry Irishman

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2010
1,883
1
81
Rather than response to the rest of your post, I'm going to say that the fact that you are more ashamed of Obama than Bush completely discredits your opinions, IMO.

If I recommend a book to you to remind you of the horrific history of Bush, would you read it? What if I offer to buy it for you?

If you read it, then I'd ask you to comment again and be happy to consider your post.

Um...that comment would be a classic case of you reading what you want to see and writing an influenced response. It's the written version of a freudian slip.

No where in my comments did I conclude a comparative shame of either. The current president is Obama and he and his trending agenda of socialism is what I'm concerned with now. We could discuss Taft but that would be about as relevant as discussing Bush right now.

That is to say unless your of the opinion that Obama inherited all of the Bush administrations problems. That may have held some merit early on but I'd have to say that the whole new set of issues that now exist can't be blamed on Bush at this point.

I wasn't a big fan of Bush but I also didn't feel like my Constitutional rights were directly under attack. We've gotten change, just no the right kind unless you like living with big brother and a debt that is basically impossible to get out from under.

Ashamed would be nice, even comfortable...I'm not ashamed of Obama I'm alarmed by him and his policies and the relentless attack on my rights as an American citizen. Ashamed would be a negative feeling and not an actual threat to my way of life.

My reading preference....I'll start with the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights which I consider to be as relevant today if not more than when originally authored. That said I'm willing to explore other points of view. What book and author are you referencing?
 
Last edited:

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Um...that comment would be a classic case of you reading what you want to see and writing an influenced response. It's the written version of a freudian slip.

No where in my comments did I conclude a comparative shame of either. The current president is Obama and he and his trending agenda of socialism is what I'm concerned with now. We could discuss Taft but that would be about as relevant as discussing Bush right now.

That is to say unless your of the opinion that Obama inherited all of the Bush administrations problems. That may have held some merit early on but I'd have to say that the whole new set of issues that now exist can't be blamed on Bush at this point.

I wasn't a big fan of Bush but I also didn't feel like my Constitutional rights were directly under attack. We've gotten change, just no the right kind unless you like living with big brother and a debt that is basically impossible to get out from under.

Ashamed would be nice, even comfortable...I'm not ashamed of Obama I'm alarmed by him and his policies and the relentless attack on my rights as an American citizen. Ashamed would be a negative feeling and not an actual threat to my way of life.

My reading preference....I'll start with the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights which I consider to be as relevant today if not more than when originally authored. That said I'm willing to explore other points of view. What book and author are you referencing?

My error in saying 'ashamed' instead of 'alarmed'. My post stands with that correction.

Bush is much more relevant than an ancient president as he's included in your time frame and a President you've seen - even if not been as informed about as I'd like.

My question was, do you agree to read a not terribly large book? If so I'll recommend it.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
That's the best part about Obama, he just gets the bad guys without starting trillion dollar wars to accomplish it.


Interestingly enough, the war in Iraq pulled a lot of AQ out of places where it was hard to find and kill them and into places where it was far easier to find and kill them. I think that was an unintended side effect and not part of the reason for the bipartisanly approved war.

IMO, democracy is contageous, and that was the main reason for the invasion of Iraq. Look all over the middle east, it appears to be having that affect.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Yea....Obama and Congress are doing wonders for the war on terror and the United States military....not in the big picture. As our military is basically gutted (it really is now) and our country is vulnerable as hell then he'll continue a parallel effort to go after veterans benefits (which he openly advocates) and ensure the remaining half of a half size military has no morale or any reason to make the military a career.

I don't think the average American even understands how gutted we are about to be in terms of our national defense and DOD capabilities as a whole. We aren't trying to be a world power any more we're trying to be partners. Even then we aren't going to be able to follow through with our agreements to our allies.

"Partners" is code for outdated military, outdated spent equipment and really shitty morale for our troops. We're basically going the way of England...no offence to the English on here, but it's true.

Yea, I'm a veteran and if you think I'm full of shit ask the average soldier, airman, sailor or marine. They are living that dream right now and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. I work with the Air Force as a civilian now and I can't imagine how it could get much worse for manning and equipment shortages. Really, there is no more fat to be cut, no more bone to be had. As much as I can't stand the man Secratary of Defense Panetta would have the same to say and he has to Congress and the President since he's been in that position.

Obama and Congress as a whole are NOT doing a good job at actually supporting the military and it's basic function but is doing a great job of feeding the media all of the great successes killing a very small click of terrorists. BTW any president would do the same.

They are also doing a wonderful job of diminishing ever so slowly our basic civil liberties...indef detention, trespassers bill, FBI backdooring internet sites, and the latest from Obama...more gun control. Not a surprise as Obama has stated that the Constitution is not relevant these days with choice words.

No I'm not a nut holed up in a compound in Idaho. I've just never been so alarmed at the actions of one man in office my entire adult life. I'm not stating opinion, I'm stating facts in terms of military capabilities and rights being lost. All of this is happening right under the average Americans nose.

Rant over.
I understand, and I agree completely. I'll just say that I think Obama is doing as good a job supporting the military as can be done - as the country will allow. W was very militarily gung ho - was he materially better? This is an issue of the extremely high cost of modern warfare, our over-commitment, our badly outdated acquisition process, and our desire to fight wars on the cheap. To pay for two wars, many worthy and even critical programs had to be cut - practically everything we had going. That left us with some very outdated and worn out material, espcially given the glacial pace of most programs and the sensible tendency to do without rather than buy something that is about to be replaced. George the First and Bill Clinton gutted our military, but they had bipartisan support in Congress and in the general population. I'd love to see another four light infantry divisions to allow more time between deployments. Hell, I think every war's costs should be paid by a special quarterly surtax on EVERYONE - all wage earners, all welfare people, all retirees - to fund deployment, acquisition and replacement costs and combat pay rather than by first using up all available funds and then going to Congress. But that position is a very small minority in American thought, and after the 2007 crash was no longer even a possibility.

I try to always give our President the benefit of the doubt, and I think what we're seeing is not Obama being anti-military, but rather the result of trying to fight two wars over a decade while simultaneously trying to build two modern nations, at least one of which is willfully anchored in the seventh century. McCain MIGHT have been better in getting money - certainly he empathizes with the military having worm the uniform so long - but I can't see how he would be any better in the War on Terror than Obama, or that either would be any better than Bush. As far as I can see, Obama has consistently made the hard calls in a timely fashion.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Did Obama start the Yemen air strikes or bush?

Congrats for Obama for the kill, but like osama, all he did was keep the same policies as bush.

Eventually the needle in the haystack will be found.

Obama pull all the wood behind the arrow pointed at Al Qaeda, instead of going on tangents. The results of that focus are what you are seeing. The needle in the haystack will only be found if you are looking in the haystack where you lost the needle.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Interestingly enough, the war in Iraq pulled a lot of AQ out of places where it was hard to find and kill them and into places where it was far easier to find and kill them. I think that was an unintended side effect and not part of the reason for the bipartisanly approved war.

IMO, democracy is contageous, and that was the main reason for the invasion of Iraq. Look all over the middle east, it appears to be having that affect.

Did you type that with a straight face? The main reason for invading Iraq was WMDs which weren't there.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,267
126
Bush took the realistic option with going into Afghanistan but that was about where he lost sense. Out should not have been nation building. We should have gone in, do the terrorists massive damage and establish a secure position to make their lives miserable. From there gather intel and make targeted strikes, and adjust as the situation warrants. Obama is handling this well but he needs to get us out of the nation building game as the idea of having a central government which is nationally recognized, is stable and is favorably disposed to the west after withdraw was, is, and shall be a fantasy.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
167
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Interestingly enough, the war in Iraq pulled a lot of AQ out of places where it was hard to find and kill them and into places where it was far easier to find and kill them. I think that was an unintended side effect and not part of the reason for the bipartisanly approved war.

IMO, democracy is contageous, and that was the main reason for the invasion of Iraq. Look all over the middle east, it appears to be having that affect.

But there's still a larger question - did the war with Iraq directly or indirectly cause even more people to join or support AQ?