[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 5, 10:12 pm, "ScottW" wrote:

Nope...because if you go back to those threads, you consistently claim
we had only one option, redeploy.

Message ID? Not even for a 'consistent' claim, but even for a single
claim?

I never argued against your tactics etc. I simply said withdrawal
was not an option I support. You selectively thrashed the entire campaign
and claimed it just proved your points.

BTW, toopid, you misrepresented what was going on... again. This
thread was not about Murtha. It was specifically about COIN strategy
and tactics. Your confused claim that you never argued with me about
that is an outright lie, or else you are mentally pretty messed up. I
suppose it could be a combination of the two as well.

The first post of this thread was, in fact, "OT: Is this how to fight
an insurgency?"



The thread I pulled these quotes from *was* a thread about strategy
and tactics in COIN ops, you moron. Go back and read it. You can still
learn something. Oh, and quit lying. It makes your claims of superior
morality look like it's coming from former Rep. Cunningham.

Of course, you've set yourself up for a huge dilemma now, toopid:
either the proposed strategy shift for Iraq is a faulty one, or you
are forced to admit that I know a lot more than you do about these
matters and that I was correct (posted CV or no, toopid), even if I am
'RIP.'

LOL! No middle ground there, toopid. Game over.

Here's another quote out of one of the messages I quoted earlier
showing you (*not* LOL!) arguing tactics with me:

**************************************************
Me:
Equally AFAWK it wasn't. You're talking 500 lb bombs here. Have you
ever seen one detonate? I have. You have to be pretty sure.

toopid:
No you don't.. its a war.

[i.e. Here's your 'conventional war' mindset, moron.]

Me:
A fine point that you may have missed: *We* started the war. *We*
invaded.

toopid:
Does that really make a difference to the boots on the ground
whose lives you seem to be offering up in some grotesque
moral sacrifice?

[i.e. Here's your "force protection at all costs, even mission
failure" mentality, toopid]

Me:
No moral sacrifice, toopid. It's how you win a COIN operation.

It makes a difference that we started the war to the people that we
are
trying to win over in Iraq. They are, BTW, the same people that the
insurgents are either trying to win over or to maintain their support
with.

And since it's our war, it *is* incumbant on us to be the ones on
moral
high ground (which we've already done our best to give up in so many
ways). We are uninvited guests in somebody else's home. We should
break
as little china as possible.

Message-ID: .com

************************************************** ***

And as I said (before you go into another misguided "YOU DON'T SUPPORT
THE TROOPS" or some other jingoistic rant) I really do hope that it's
not too late. We 'dissidents' in the Army have been laughed at (by
people like you, rummy, and bushie, toopid) for nearly four years. If
this effort fails, it is not the fault of the soldiers trying to
implement the strategy which should have been implemented from the get-
go.

So as you see, toopid, you are lying yet again. You flounder and
thrash about, all the while having not one single small clue. Not even
one small whiff of a shadow of an outline of a trace of a small clue.

The hilarious part is how absolutely sure you are that you are
correct. And you base this certitude on... exactly what, again?

Prediction: now that toopid is backed into a corner... again, he will
pout that the post is "too long and boring" or he will disappear into
a hole in the woodwork like the small rat-like rodent he is.

LOL!

Moron.