Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[yesman065]

TW - as usual you missed the point - What I was referring to was your innate ability to selectively choose only negative quotes from an article in an attempt to support your point of view - The woute nor subject matter were not the issue at hand. You are always so quick to attack opposing points of view and manipulate information in a VERY transparent attempt to make yourself look smart that any valid point you may have had gets lost.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by yesman065

TW - as usual you missed the point - What I was referring to was your innate ability to selectively choose only negative quotes from an article in an attempt to support your point of view - The woute nor subject matter were not the issue at hand. You are always so quick to attack opposing points of view and manipulate information in a VERY transparent attempt to make yourself look smart that any valid point you may have had gets lost.

Don't waste your time.

[tw]

Originally Posted by yesman065

TW - as usual you missed the point - What I was referring to was your innate ability to selectively choose only negative quotes from an article in an attempt to support your point of view ...

And again I repeat - all those questions posed at you are necessary to appreciate why what I posted was the KEY fact in that article.

Go back many years to see my posts that worried about "Misson Accomplished" becoming exactly what we now have. You call it negative? Well then why have those negatives become reality?

The 'capture' of those towns only demonstrates a blunt reality. Same stories were reported in Nam. But I suspect David Petraeus is doing something very smart. My posts are suggesting to you a much larger picture. Do you see it?

Can a private see the war being won? Not without grasping a bigger picture. In a post that you find so negative, I may be reporting a much larger story that may the rescue of the US Army from another Nam. That last sentence made your eyes big - if you start grasping big picture.

But if caught looking only at petty little details - ie the capture of two towns or body counts - then you have no idea that a bigger picture even exists.

Those questions are not debating points. They go right after what you must comprehend to then see a bigger picture:

What is the strategic significance of that capture? And why, after that capture, does Gen Petraeus talk about decades of military operations? Do you really think that is coincidence?

Your post must have grasp of why Gen Petraeus has expanded his quote from nine years to decades.

Your reply must explain the difference between a tactical and strategic objective. Be very careful in your answer to that question: What is the strategic signficiant of that capture?

what do 'biblical' philosphies of guerrilla warfare dictate in response to a conventional army offensive?

None of these questions were posted to argue. They were posted to get you to appreciate a bigger picture that is neither negative nor positive. To appreciate why I reported fundamental mistake after mistake made even in violation of first year military science concepts. To appreciate how much worse "Mission Accomplished" really is.

Do you think I was just playing politics criticizing the disbanning of the Iraqi army and police? Not for one minute. I saw a major looming disaster. Guess what. Everyone now sees that disaster - but years later. Did you even for one minute think pre-emption was a formula for something different from disaster? That is the mistake so common among 'big dic' thinkers. Did you see a disaster looming because we abandoned containment in favor of pre-emption? Why not. Were you looking at the big picture - or viewing from a Private's perspective.

To gain from this thread, answer those questions. See a bigger picture - not petty politics that were never in that post. Daily news reports do not yet report the massive numbers of dead - resulting massacres that are yet to happen but that may be inevitable using our current tactics - no strategic objective. Just another reason why my posts years ago were so forboding. Again, do you see what Petraeus is really saying?

Appreciate that "Mission Accomplished" is already unwinnable. Appreciate why "Misson Accomplished" could mean a second defeat in Afghanistan. Appreciate a larger significance in "When do we go after bin Laden?" How? Start by answering those requoted questions.

"When do we go after bin Laden" is not just some cheap shot at the wacko extremists. It is a much larger question about everything we are doing - Deja vue Nam. Our current actions have no possiblity of victory. What is one major symptom of the malaise - a mistake being made at the highest (strategic) levels? "When do we go after bin Laden?"

Your post argues about size of dirt particles in a response to post that discusses geology of an entire island. Those questions are not debating points. Stop wasting time with body counts. Those questions beg you to appreciate a bigger picture - by answering them.

Tell us why the 'cature' of two towns in a province that once had no warfare is now an example of "Mission Accomplished"?

[yesman065]

1) Significance - I guess if you don't see it, there mustn't be any. He explained his timetable and why he gave it so there is no reason for me to answer a question based upon an article YOU cited and apparently selectively read.
2)See above - The general explained himself just fine - no need for me to infer or make assumptions - that's your game.
3) My reply need not do anything YOU demand - who the hell are you to tell me what I can and/or cannot post.
4) What the hell does that have to do with anything? Never mind I really don't care what you think. You mind is like a steel trap that was left out in the rain.
5) No one said it did - except you. "Mission Accomplished" was discussed ad nauseum long ago and the only one who continues to misinterpret it is YOU.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by yesman065

1) Significance - I guess if you don't see it, there mustn't be any. He explained his timetable and why he gave it so there is no reason for me to answer a question based upon an article YOU cited and apparently selectively read.
2)See above - The general explained himself just fine - no need for me to infer or make assumptions - that's your game.
3) My reply need not do anything YOU demand - who the hell are you to tell me what I can and/or cannot post.
4) What the hell does that have to do with anything? Never mind I really don't care what you think. You mind is like a steel trap that was left out in the rain.
5) No one said it did - except you. "Mission Accomplished" was discussed ad nauseum long ago and the only one who continues to misinterpret it is YOU.

Let me introduce you to our friend:

[yesman065]

Ya know Merc, I left because I didn't like what a "discussion" with tw (Total Whackjob) turned into and I swore I wouldn't get into it with him again - oh well once an _______always an _______.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Me, I just like telling tw he has no political acumen, is delusional, is a whackjob, is a mental masturbator, is a very inferior sort of being. While he doesn't have to be an inferior sort of being, he clearly prefers that to becoming enlightened: he'd rather be Left than right.

For his manifold sins and anti-American wickedness, I torment him. And there is absolutely nothing he can do about it except turn procapitalist and pro-American. In short, to escape his current torment, he has to more resemble me.

Feel free to dump on the commie until he converts or flees the Cellar. He has not fled yet, so I reckon him for a communist masochist. He posts, subconsciously, to show himself that the world is none too friendly to such as he. What he doesn't understand is that it's his own fault.

[DanaC]

wow. *grabs a bag of popcorn* fucking fascinating.

[theotherguy]

Slide over. I brought drinks.

[TheMercenary]

I found tw's pic on the FBI website:

[Urbane Guerrilla]

It's even more fascinating when it's fucking.

That's on account of the change of position...

P.S.: For the record, the miffed-at-GEICO looking Ted Kacsinski is definitely on the Celebrity Won't-Bang List.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Me, I just like telling tw he has no political acumen, is delusional, is a whackjob, is a mental masturbator, is a very inferior sort of being. While he doesn't have to be an inferior sort of being, he clearly prefers that to becoming enlightened: he'd rather be Left than right.

For his manifold sins and anti-American wickedness, I torment him. And there is absolutely nothing he can do about it except turn procapitalist and pro-American. In short, to escape his current torment, he has to more resemble me.

Feel free to dump on the commie until he converts or flees the Cellar. He has not fled yet, so I reckon him for a communist masochist. He posts, subconsciously, to show himself that the world is none too friendly to such as he. What he doesn't understand is that it's his own fault.

That kind of childish taunting doesn't reflect well on your position.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Me, I just like telling tw he has no political acumen, is delusional, is a whackjob, is a mental masturbator, is a very inferior sort of being. While he doesn't have to be an inferior sort of being, he clearly prefers that to becoming enlightened: he'd rather be Left than right.

For his manifold sins and anti-American wickedness, I torment him. And there is absolutely nothing he can do about it except turn procapitalist and pro-American. In short, to escape his current torment, he has to more resemble me.

Feel free to dump on the commie until he converts or flees the Cellar. He has not fled yet, so I reckon him for a communist masochist. He posts, subconsciously, to show himself that the world is none too friendly to such as he. What he doesn't understand is that it's his own fault.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

That kind of childish taunting doesn't reflect well on your position.

I disagree, xoB. I think it reflects his position *perfectly*.

Furthermore, he knows it, too:

If your thinking's actually good enough, you need not bolster it with abusive language. Nor need you indulge in hysterics.

Care to guess the identity of our mystery guest, author of this sage advice?

A clue.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

And his posts still declare him a communist, his actions a masochist. Aaand I can make him blow up any time I want to.

I've seen this kind of behavior from leftists before. It illustrates a certain kind of emotional immaturity which I have also seen from leftists, which seems to me necessary to be one. The conservatives of my acquaintance act and think in a more adult fashion. Speaking of adult, there is nothing juvenile whatever in my listing tw's mental properties, nor is there taunting. The man avoids understanding that he's a fool. Unfortunately for him, everyone else knows that.

It is on occasion difficult to find words for the depth of my contempt when he delivers himself of something particularly wrongheaded and violently anti-American, and the intensity of my struggle to express it may sometimes be seen in the length of the adjectival sentences I apostrophize him with.

Some days my Internet To-Do List looks rather like this:

See what's new on The Armour Archive

Ditto the Living History Library

Savage tw at least once

Look at Philosophy forum and see if Happy Monkey is still doing well there

Google up "black cardamom" to find out what to do with a bag of the stuff -- the most original suggestion is stew a couple pods with a mug of scratchbuilt hot chocolate

Savage tw on some other point -- the only business that man has talking politics is to turn people off to Communism anyway

Give piercehawkeye a ration, too, for not being a partisan for democracy

Pause to make sure I'm not smirching my soul doing this

Wrap the session up with Mudcat or Strike The Root

[xoxoxoBruce]

You're a little light on the pausing.