On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:47:44 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...



This conflict will require a much smarter approach. Unfortunately, much of
it must be hidden. And, what does NOT need to be hidden makes for lousy TV
footage, for those among us who need to see weapons in action in order to
think something is being accomplished. Or, in order to get a rush or an
erection, and then base their voting decisions on these sensations. War
for the sake of war is the result of a mind that never passed the age of
16.

My prediction is that the methods we tried in Iraq will be obsolete in the
near future.


I agree ... except for the 16 year old mindset thing. The inertia of our
defense structure will take years to modify and change ... step by step. In
the meantime, big guns is all we have and are structured for.

We are going to have to accept actions that we never tolerated publicly
before. Assassinations without obvious, justifiable cause and other covert
actions that have disturbed the public in the past.

I hope I am wrong in my personal assessment. I'd like nothing better to be
remembered as a concerned nut that was wrong.

I wrote a pretty long reply to your post that got you called "nut
job." It was in vehement disagreement, and addressed the "fear
factor" aspect, noting in some detail how backward muslims compare
to a few thousand Soviet nukes waiting to launch at us.
Included some notes on globalism, etc.
But I tossed it because it might be a bit incendiary, and I want
to get all the advice I can suck out of this group before I start
antagonizing the advice-givers.
Seeing how level-headed the banter is here compared to some other
groups, I'm glad I tossed it. But I toss most of my "political" posts
now unless I'm really bored. It's fun writing them, though. Might
be compared to posting in a boat group, but not having a boat.

--Vic