USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[SFWanabe 0]

Pistols at 20 paces.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Ah the Napoleanic way...such a gentlemanly way.

Seeing that was the method of fighting infantry battles from the introduction of the musket to the end of the U.S. Civil War - the Battle of Gettysburg (Pickett's Charge) being perhaps the most spectacular line charge in history.

Oh for certain. It was almost required for large engagments until rifling came along, because you couldn't hit jack with the guns!

But then rifling came along which should have drastically changed battlefield tactics, but it didn't. Troops still marched straight up to deadlier and more accurate weapons.

[harley 3 1185 0]

It took balls, that's for sure - regiment after regiment marching in formation right into a hail of cannon fire and a fusilade of rifled muskets - ouch. There wouldn't be such slaughter until the introduction of indirect heavy artillery.

[chops 111]

but the lesson of Vietnam war is that you can't let those who can't defend themselves due to lack of own strength do all the work. notice that both the South Vietnamese people and Iraqi population did not give much damn about freedom and democracy. when someone is not able to take responsibility, they cannot defend themselves.

The responsibility lies squarely at the feet of the invading and occupying forces. Geneva convention says so.

The arrogance of TBA is staggering, invade a country for no justifiable reason, then expect the inhabitants to do all the dirty work for you.

It seems "Vietnamization" was the phase preceeding the withdrawl of US forces. Perhaps we're seeing that already in Iraq? Although it's difficult to imagine TBA doing something wise

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/14/pornstar.gop.ap/index.html

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (AP) -- Blond porn star, political candidate. And now you can add one more line to Mary Carey's resume: Republican booster.

Carey was in Washington Tuesday to attend the President's Dinner, an annual fundraiser put on by the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

A few hours before the dinner, Carey met with reporters to show off her evening gown and talk about a Republican lunch she and her boss, adult film executive Mark Kulkis, attended.

"I met a lot of nice people," Carey said of the lunch, where presidential adviser Karl Rove spoke. "I met some people who talked about helping me with donating money to my next campaign."

She plans to run for lieutenant governor of California next year as an independent. But her trip to Washington has swayed Carey's political leanings. She says she's been a Republican "for a couple of days."

Anyone expecting her to cause a scene with her attire at the President's Dinner might be disappointed.

She was wearing a black, floor-length gown. The only color added to the outfit was her red, white and blue Republican elephant lapel pin and similarly patriotic fingernails.

maybe I should 'support' GOP.

[Warin 0]

Hey, she knows what it takes to give a he... er... get ahead in politics! The only difference between porn stars and politicians is that while each group will end up screwing you, at least with the porn star you might enjoy it!

[harley 3 1185 0]

A porn star is generally pleasing to the eye; a politician ain't. Well, if they elected a foreign-born ex-bodybuilder/superstar actor (with many skeletons in his closet) to the Governorship, what the hell! Vote for the porn star, ye Californians-she'd compliment Swarzenegger nicely.

[miles teg 1]

but the lesson of Vietnam war is that you can't let those who can't defend themselves due to lack of own strength do all the work. notice that both the South Vietnamese people and Iraqi population did not give much damn about freedom and democracy. when someone is not able to take responsibility, they cannot defend themselves.

The responsibility lies squarely at the feet of the invading and occupying forces. Geneva convention says so.

The arrogance of TBA is staggering, invade a country for no justifiable reason, then expect the inhabitants to do all the dirty work for you.

It seems "Vietnamization" was the phase preceeding the withdrawl of US forces. Perhaps we're seeing that already in Iraq? Although it's difficult to imagine TBA doing something wise

Well already more Republicans are calling for a timetable for the withdrawl of US troops. However as things are, you can almost be assured that any government we leave in power will collapse on its own if we left anytime soon.

Their military units are improving but they take very heavy hits to their morale when former comrads blow themselves up inside their baracks and things like that.

They still urgently require their own urban armor force and their own air support.

It should be a high priority to equip Iraqi troops with cheap but effective armor and air power.

BTR-80's with slat armor, m113's with slat armor, and uparmored T-55's are all cheap ways to give the Iraqi defense force some solid heavy armor cheaply that can take some hits from RPG's. In addition, equipping them with Mi-8/17 HIP transport helicopters, and Mi-24 Hind gunships would give them rapid response capability, medivacs, and heavy fire power from the air at a fraction of the cost of buying and maintaining Blackhawks and Apaches.

For most of the Russian kit, they already have Iraqis who are trained on or familiar with the stuff as well.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[harley 3 1185 0]

The Iraqi Government, utilising some of it's oil money, should really start trying to attract more of these ex-army people, ex-security personnel to come and train the Iraqi Defense forces. I know it's not the easiest thing to train for, but with Western "Mercenary" assistance I'm sure that the Iraqis will continue to get more and more adroit at combatting terrorism and insurgencies. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would go to Iraq for a piece of action (War is a difficult habit to shake off) and relieve some of those who aren't exactly happy to be there.

[miles teg 1]

Oh yeah for sure it will be big business for PMC's (Private Military Corporations).  However ALOT of that oil money is disappearing into swiss bank accounts of corrupt Iraqi government officials as well as foreign companies. Where all of the oil revenues are going is kept highly classified.

Also alot of those ex-Saddam era military people are either working for the insurgency or they are dead.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[ralphwiggum 6]

but the lesson of Vietnam war is that you can't let those who can't defend themselves due to lack of own strength do all the work. notice that both the South Vietnamese people and Iraqi population did not give much damn about freedom and democracy. when someone is not able to take responsibility, they cannot defend themselves.

The responsibility lies squarely at the feet of the invading and occupying forces. Geneva convention says so.

The arrogance of TBA is staggering, invade a country for no justifiable reason, then expect the inhabitants to do all the dirty work for you.

It seems "Vietnamization" was the phase preceeding the withdrawl of US forces. Perhaps we're seeing that already in Iraq? Although it's difficult to imagine TBA doing something wise

the responsibility is still with TBA. however, I'm giving an objective perspective of what needs to be done for a democracy to work. You can take a horese to a stream but you can't make it drink the water.

it should have been forseen that Iraqis are not yet ready to stand on their own. TBA should have seen that coming, but they failed.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Their military units are improving

Doubted, as they only get a 2 week training by US soldiers.

I posted a report on it a while ago. They basically can´t even hit a target on 15m´s with an AK.

You can inflate the statistical numbers by pressing thousands through a 2 week military training in short time, but it´s a force that´s not worth the name, neither on the paper nor in reality.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]Third, my point is that if this is one of considered one of the glorious victories the US fought alone, then the original point that the US has only won against inferior opponents stands.

United States-- 13,780 dead, many more wounded.

Mexico-- Much higher than the U.S. total. One figure put Mexican casualties at approximately 25,000.

So? Soviets killed a hell lot more Mujahideen than the opposite. Casualties do not equal the outcome.

[SFWanabe 0]

That only applies to if your measuring your success on a bodycount.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Third, my point is that if this is one of considered one of the glorious victories the US fought alone, then the original point that the US has only won against inferior opponents stands.

United States-- 13,780 dead, many more wounded.

Mexico-- Much higher than the U.S. total. One figure put Mexican casualties at approximately 25,000.

So? Soviets killed a hell lot more Mujahideen than the opposite. Casualties do not equal the outcome.

Somehow you skipped what was written below...

Quote[/b] ]I wouldn't say that was a cake walk down in Mexico

:/

[SFWanabe 0]

Hmmmmmmmm....could be......

[Sophion-Black 0]

Quote[/b] ]Their military units are improving

Doubted, as they only get a 2 week training by US soldiers.

I posted a report on it a while ago. They basically can´t even hit a target on 15m´s with an AK.

You can inflate the statistical numbers by pressing thousands through a 2 week military training in short time, but it´s a force that´s not worth the name, neither on the paper nor in reality.

"Operation: Lightning"

id say they're getting something done over there.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Operation: Lightning"

What has been the success of it yet ?

Claimed 40,000 soldiers and police forces are said to search and block Baghdad and the rural area around it. Up to now around 150 suspects have been detained. I wouldn´t call this a sucessfull mission, looking at the carbombs that still go off daily in Baghdad.

So no, Operation lighting is a papertiger and I even don´t believe the numbers of troops involved as there is no force of 40.000 soldiers and police units united in Baghdad.

There are not even accomodations or equipment for 40.000 soldiers.

I´m checking the news from Baghdad daily and a mass of 40.000 can hardly be overseen. Still I haven´t seen more than 200 soldiers in one place and that was for training purposes, so the credibility of this 40.000 units efforts is highly doubted.

Edit: Up to May the 30th about 740 people were killed by attacks in Iraq. This is the number from April 28th to May the 30th. The attacks are not getting weaker. They are getting harder and more sofisticated as we learned during the last weeks.

I can see no effect of Operation Lighting as I can´t see a longterm readiness of Iraqui security forces of any kind.

It is one thing to claim they are improving, in numbers and quality, like worldhealer G.W. claims, but the reality just doesn´t bend to his vision.

Hardly surprising that a president who says that he doesn´t read news or watch the TV news at last has no idea of what is going on there as everything he gets to read and sees is preemptively chewed by Brick Cheney.

[Sophion-Black 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Operation: Lightning"

What has been the success of it yet ?

Up to now around 150 suspects have been detained...

MORALE AND EXPERIANCE!!!

Get your facts straight, the number of detained climbs higher every day. Remember that its still going on now. Look at what happened 10 DAYS AGO

you got facts to back up those statements of "no force of 40.000 soldiers and police units united in Baghdad"? The Iraqis have to get some type of experiance for their operations to be successful. It also puts more clues to were the real bases are located. Do you realize that theres only 1 person that attacks that killes like 30 people. besides they're getting harder because they're getting desperate:

US victory #1

US victory #2

US victory #3

[Balschoiw 0]

Hehe sorry, I don´t even feel tempted to read something from foxnews...

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Hehe sorry, I don´t even feel tempted to read something from foxnews...

I guess you don't read AP releases also. :/

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I guess you don't read AP releases also. :/

Do you want to tell me something specific or is it just another billybob gossip ?

In case you had forgotten, I ignore your posts.

[SFWanabe 0]

Whats the deal with that porn star in the white house?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Do you want to tell me something specific or is it just another billybob gossip ?  

In case you had forgotten, I ignore your posts.  

If you clicked those links, you would know they are all AP releases like majority of their important news items are from on their site. But, hey, you ignore my posts...  

[Akira 0]

Seems a N. Carolina Republican representative and a Democratic representative from Hawaii jointly proposed a resolution today that would call for the TBA to have a firm Iraq withdrawl plan by the end of the year, and for withdrawls to begin on Oct. 1. 2006.

This of course was flatly rejected by the White House. An interesting quote from D-HI:

"the continued occupation by the United States armed forces that is an object for the insurgents to point to make a rationale for what they're doing against us."

This is the quote from TBA spokenman:

"This message would say to the terrorists: 'All you have to do is wait until that day when our troops leave and then you can start carrying out those attacks and just hold out."'

In any case, the resolution won't get very far, but I found it interesting that it was offered bipartisanly. It reflects the growing concern of the nation and Congress on whether or not we are ever going to leave. The Penatgon and TBA have refused (and some in Congress have supported this) setting a firm date for withdrawl, stating this will only embolden the insurgents. That is a ridiculous statement for the simple fact that insurgents don't need to be emboldened. They are not going to suddenly get more violent because the US states its going to leave on such-and-such date.

One thing is for sure...looks like we will be there a long time.