[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jun 26, 2:21*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Jun 26, 12:10*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

But I do, 2pid. A few snipers in a single building are easily screened
with smoke. Breaking contact with snipers like that is one of the
easiest actions you can do. And as I said, there are times when CAS
*is* appropriate. That wasn't one of them.

*How do you know the "snipers" were the only enemy forces in the area?
*You don't.

Do too. It was an official report on a Marine Corps site, dum-dum.

Don't you suppose if there was a brigade of T-84 tanks coing around
the bend they might just have mentioned that?

Duh. Off we go into 2pid's imaginary "what if" game.

* You also don't know if the snipers were in a position to cover the
path of escape our troops needed to take and you don't know how
long they had to effect their escape from peril.

As I said, 2pid, snipers are easily screened with smoke. Patrols carry
smoke genades, dum-dum.

I don't care if *you* agree with me, 2pid. You're an unintelligent and
inexperienced dumb****.

*The list of things you don't know grows.

Oh, I do know that you're an unintelligent and inexperienced dumb****.
There's no doubt there at all. LoL.

The Army leadership agrees and that what does matter. LoL.

BS, even in the last action where rules were broken they still the
use of CAS was justified. *You're just too blockheaded to accept
anything that shows your "black and white" claims are meaningless
in the fog of war.

Um, 2pid? Did you see the part about "poorly planned" operation?
That's why CAS was "justifiede": They got their asses in a sling
because the operation was "poorly planned"

Now I know you approve of stupidity like that. I don't. LoL.

You also at one point advocated soldiers kicking in doors at
incredible risk to our guys. * I'm not going to advocate a door to
door campaign in the interest of rooting out the Taliban. * How
selfish would I be to demand our young soldiers expose themselves to
such risk to prevent Al Qaeda from maybe doing something?

The point was (and is), 2pid, that we're not there to make sure fewer
Americans die. LoL.

*Welcome to the front of the line on that.

If that was the point of a military operation, 2pid, we wouldn't have
military operations.

Go back and reread what I've said about balancing force protection
with mission accomplishment.

Jesus you're obtuse. LoL.

Cost/benefit isn't close IMO. *Buy, hey, if you're all gun-ho to go
kick some
doors in, good luck. *Idiocy is the only trait evolution can still
address in the human race.

"Cost/benefit" is in human lives, and may mean success or failure.
Nobody looks forward to kicking doors in, 2pid. Nobody sane actually
looks forward to being in a combat zone. It's very counterintuitive.
LoL.

And BTW: nice slam on American troops.

*I don't slam the troops. I slam the idiot majors with a political
agenda who put their troops at unnecessary and IMO excessive risk
in a campaign that ultimately won't matter.

What a treasonous defeatist.

But it's Obama's war now and your party bound to support it.

I supported operations in Afghanistan even when bushie was President.
You can go back and look, dum-dum.

But then bushie just *had* to take his eye off the ball. The reason
there's an "Obama's War" is because bushie was too stupid to see what
happens when you are trying to fight on two front. See "Operation
Overlord" and "Operation Barbarossa" for a lesson on that. LoL.

What a numbskull.