On running the war

Post #148,540 by boxley 3/25/04 2:17:25 PM Reply	On running the war The occupation was not well planned. Paying Chalabi 300k a month makes us all look like fools, shades of Batista. Putting soldiers in the field without good equipment is criminal. In WW2 you had jeeps fitted with 50cals for transport support, modern equivelent of cavalry outriders for a wagon train. They didnt deploy anything so transpotation troops got hit hard and unescesarily. On the eve of the push into Afghanistan plane load after planeload of Hercules aircraft filled with senior Taliban and El Quida were allowed to fly into Pakistan, we should have agreed to it then shot them down. Bush and Co let them go. His ties to the House of Saud are way to cozy and in my opinion have cost us in the fight against terror. The taking over of the republican party by neocons is a joke, a dangerous joke. Time for a change, preferably a heavy republican legislature and a democratic presidency to prevent excess of either side. thanx, bill In Bush\ufffds America, fighting terrorism abroad is used as a pretext for vanquishing civil liberties at home. David Podvin questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #148,572 by danreck 3/25/04 5:08:59 PM Reply	So you really believe that? That they conducted the operations innefficiently? I was amazed at how well it all went. Really. Having been in the Army, it amazes me that the ass clowns who run the place can even get water to the troups. The President is in charge of ground logistics? I always imagined that the Pres told the pentagon what the objectives were and they handled the details... As per the Saudis (et al), which president has not bent over to any OPEC nation, forgetting human rights et al... We the fucking people are starting to complain about the price of gas right now. I suppose the president who takes the moral high ground will get high marks for his courage and fortitude when gasoline costs $5 per gallon, right? Bullshit. We the fucking people will vote his sorry ass out quicker than shit through a goose. Change? I would vote for a change if I was given a choice. Who, other than Nader, stands for real change? Will you vote for him or will you buy into the steaming pile of bile and bullshit from the other white meat? Change for change sake is not necessarily a good thing. We had 8 years of flipflopping assclownery prior to Shrub. Package a snake oil salesman however you wish. JFK. Sorry, Box, but I'm not buying it and I don't believe that most independents will. Oh well. Just a few thoughts, Danno
Post #148,593 by boxley 3/25/04 6:18:04 PM Reply	Again Unless the Patriot act is recinded Im voting for the other assclown. Just dont like neoconns. As far as preparedness they went in without adequate supplies and equipment because the hmic ordered them in. Frank wanted to wait, he was told to get his ass in there. thanx, In Bush\ufffds America, fighting terrorism abroad is used as a pretext for vanquishing civil liberties at home. David Podvin questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]

Welcome to IWETHEY!