Comments on: Molten Death, Up Close and Personal

By: payman

payman — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 06:24:20 +0000

efp

By: Vendeta

Vendeta — Wed, 16 May 2007 19:33:54 +0000

Remember anyone Rambo III? He was going to Avghanistan to help talibans to fight against russians. Same talibans to whom US Army gave stingers to destroy russians helicopters…And then no one speak about that, but now, when roles are reversed game is not so well accepted by the Americans…As Metalica says in one of it’s songs …“Sad but true”

By: Wembley

Wembley — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:38:48 +0000

“It is not just copper disc“
– but let’s just get this copper disc issue sorted first, shall we?
Have we seen any serious evidence that these are in any way linked to the Iranian government?
We seem to get a blizzard of these allegations that blow up and then melt when they come under scrutiny (remember those sniper rifles?). But gullible people are left with the impression that there must be something behind them.

By: Grandjester

Grandjester — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:32:36 +0000

C-low, now you are just contradicting yourself. Replace your strongman with moderate govt? Get real. Every indicator in Iraq is that we (the invader/occupier) are the hated party.
Is all out war across the ME the only option? If so why did we go into Iraq half assed? Your arguments just don’t make sense.

By: C-Low

C-Low — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:54:04 +0000

By: C-Low

C-Low — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:31:30 +0000

Max
I would like to hear the 3rd fence option. When you are attacked you do not have the privilege to choose when the attack stops your only option is fight until attacker is dead/subdued or surrender and hope for mercy.
Jester
I read the article and don’t really disagree with it just its conclusions. I don’t think their is a war in history were the death, cost, damage was less prior to engagement than during the engagement. Although I don’t see how that would say the enemy is winning since death, cost, damage has gone up since we engaged. I also don’t recognize how its Bush’s fault we have to go to war? When Clinton was prez we were attacked multiple times aswell and if not for sheer luck the 93′ WT, millennium, and Muhamad Philippine plans would have had death tolls at least equal to the 3k of 9–11 (and I don’t think any US prez could allow a enemy kill thousands of US citizens without going to war).
Bottom line I think if Gore would have been prez we would have still invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq. I don’t know if you guys realize it but Blair’s Labor is the British equal of the US Democratic Party. Hind sight is 20/20 immediately following 9–11 Afghanistan and Iraq were both seen as imminent threats. Afghanistan due to Bin Laden training camps, Iraq due to Saddam WMD worldwide suspicion of, Saddam support of Suicide Bombers in Israel, Saddams glorification in speech and murals of 9–11. What the evidence looks like now is useless to a decision made immediately following 9–11.
If you doubt the fact a Democratic president looking at 3k dead US civilians in a 9–11 level event would not have gone after Saddam, explain the Congressional Vote 2003?
Nobody can travel in time or see the future. We are all humans we make decisions on the Intel of the moment. Their is no guarantees in life.
You cannot just criticize someone

By: Grandjester

Grandjester — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:35:42 +0000

Intersting take on the al-Qaida “Master Plan” and how we are playing into it. The parallels to the Soviet collapse are striking (IMHO there are quite a few parallels to the British experiance at the end of the colonial period as well).
http://www.alternet.org/stories/47703/
Since this is a from “leftie” site, I would expect C-low, OBL master plan intepreter supreme, to discount it utterly.

By: The other other other Max

The other other other Max — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:38:12 +0000

C-Low, you provided two options, one of which is, essentially, what we’re doing now, the other of which is surrender. You claimed those were the only two options. That is false. It is a forced binary choice, of the sort we see all the damn time in American political discourse. The only purpose they serve is to polarize the political process and electorate. That is to say, they are destructive, and hinder intelligent policy making. When sound bytes replace discussion, the nation suffers.
To be clear ‘Both sides’ (there’s another one!) of the fence do this.

By: JAFO

JAFO — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 15:15:55 +0000

“C-low. You seem hung up on this left/right thing and making connections that are dubious at best and btw have nothing to do with this thread. Which is about efps and whether or not they are of Iranian origin. Iraq did not attack us on 9–11, nor did Iran.“
–Grandjester
Couldn’t have said it better myself. You are really off on an ideological tangent, C-Low. Your “facts” are all over the place, conclusions all mixed up… and you just conveniently leave out anything that doesn’t fit in with your already (mal)formed grand conclusion.
For what it’s worth, I am neither “Right” nor “Left” (whatever the hell that even means anymore). If you choose to see everything in black and white, you will always miss the real picture. I don’t want to engage in a flame war with you on this blog, either. I’m strictly speaking tactically and strategically… and the facts still remain:
EFP’s are easy to make for any bombmaker worth his weight in fish sauce.
EFP’s are nothing new or high tech — and terrorists have also been using them for some time now.
We have very little leverage to deal with Iran now, as we are in a precarious position now with our forced stretched out in Iraq.
Short of nuking Iran off the map, any attack would only be a grave mistake and put all of our forces in grave peril right now.
all of my assertions have been right in line with what the VAST MAJORITY of Generals/military experts are saying — and have said.
Unfortunately, the Politicians in charge have constantly ignored — over and over again — the advice of the Generals and Chiefs of Staff, and officers on the ground. When Casey and Abizaid said the surge was not the right course, they were fired (oh, that’s right, “promoted”) just like Shinseki — and all the rest who dared to speak the truth.
Isntead of listening to politicians, pundits and radio talk show hosts, you’d be better served listening to the Generals and Military folks who have seen this coming the whole time.
Sorry I don’t have time to go back and forth with you today…
Later

By: Grandjester

Grandjester — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:23:43 +0000

C-low, NOW we are supposed to read the PAST writings of Osama Bin Hidin? Didn’t our CinC say he wasn’t important, didn’t think about him? I thought the past didn’t enter into your equation “When making decisions about what to do now or were to go from here we must look at the table as it is today.“
Look son, you’re jest outta your league here, looks like we got ya about 20 to 1 on this thing, perhaps you should return to Red State or Little Green Footballs where this sort of thing plays.