In article ,
says...


Any idea how many innocent Iraqis, Syrians and who knows who else have
been slaughtered so far by ISIS? I don't know what the estimated total
is but it's a pretty large number. There are unconfirmed reports of
killing off children simply because they had Christian parents. The
"rapper" isn't doing all the killing by himself.

Here's one account of Iraq civilian casualties.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...an-death-toll-
5500-2014-isis

Of course I don't know what's considered "civilian" over there.
War is pretty "natural" to Arab Muslims.
They don't need guns - stones will do.
I wonder if you did a poll over there about whether stoning to death for
adultery, dressing out of "code," etc, what the results would be.

On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't worked so far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the military has done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat unique (I think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a civilian career
that eventually included owning and running a small company consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me. Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I received more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return during the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures are more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal arts grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld (Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...

On 9/3/14 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:02:54 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Unfortunately these drone strikes are not nearly as surgical as the
government would have you believe. We are creating far more militants
than we kill.

And far less than troops on the ground. Pick your poison.

I just think the psychological effect of drones is the opposite of
what we want.
We act like there is some kind of Yamamoto out there that will
seriously degrade their capability if we kill him.
The reality is the knowledge is pretty freely disseminated among the
gangs and there is no one single leader or mechanic who is key to the
operation. We only make martyrs. When we take out a bunch of
innocents, it is just a recruiting tool. I suppose we can just kill
them all but there is over a billion of them world wide


That is correct. Having the biggest, baddest military in the world is
not relevant anymore.

On 9/3/2014 12:39 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 10:18:55 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


I think you will soon see a deployment of up to 5,000 troops in Iraq
with a mission to hunt down and kill any or all ISIS members. Syria is
a different problem and will require some more behind the scenes
negotiations.

Why 5,000? It took 166,000 U.S. troops to quell unrest in '07.
You think the IED'S, snipers, suicide bombers won't kill and maim U.S.
troops in 2014?
Besides, there' over 1200 U.S. troops in Baghdad now, just to protect
the embassy and airport.
Hunting down of ISIS will be done with air strikes or special force
teams. They're just criminals, and will be destroyed.
Their beheading of Americans is simply suicide by another name.
Of course they don't care, being criminals with a death wish.

Evidence points to a rapper doing the actual beheadings.
Figures. Rappers with guns, IED's, and knives for the easy stuff,
The Arabs can kill civilians without our help, and without the sacrifice
of our troops to no good end.
I saw an Iraqi "man on the street" interview recently about this ISIS
"crisis." Neatly dressed man verging on middle-age with a couple kids.
He didn't want U.S. troops there. Hope he gets his wish.
Like the "British rapper" he is an Arab infected with Muslimism.
It's a worse disease than Ebola.
Until they get the disease under control, they need Saddams, Qaddafis
and Assads.


Unfortunately these drone strikes are not nearly as surgical as the
government would have you believe. We are creating far more militants
than we kill.


Bigger bombs, less militants created.... It's a cancer, and the
people who are living among ISIS, and not trying to kill them, are just
supporting them and need to go too...

On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 12:13:22 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

I am not supporting new crusades. Just pointing out that the Muslim
religion has pretty much used violence to expand. Harry thinks it is all
new. Bad liberal arts education. Dang Yale.

Or was that Kansas that failed him?

===

Since there's not a shred of evidence to indicate that Harry ever set
foot inside of Yale other than perhaps as a hod carrier on a brick
laying team, I'd have to conclude that it was Kansas that failed him.

On 9/3/14 2:49 PM, KC wrote:
On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't worked so
far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the military has
done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat unique (I
think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a civilian
career
that eventually included owning and running a small company
consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly
efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me. Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special
privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I received
more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return during the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures are
more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal arts grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld (Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...



The anti-intellectualism expressed here by you righties is just frippin'
hilarious. Human intel gathering is best done by humans with liberal
arts educations. Of course, few of you even know what a liberal arts
education encompasses. Hell, most of you righties can't even follow a
thread without drifting way off course.

I was discussing our failures in human intel, *not* waving the flag for
the wonderful accomplishments of military personnel. Bilious Bill as
usual cannot follow any conversation without tripping over it. Fretwell
throws in neocons and their college majors, and, of course, the
newsgroup psychotic is off in outer space, as usual.

I'm not talking about photo interpretation, or about figuring out what
scientific data means...I'm talking about using knowledge of language,
history, personality analysis, cultural differences...the tools a field
agent uses to gather human intel. You know, the kind of stuff that
indicates where Osama might have been hiding, or what was on his mind,
or who he spoke with, or who he slept with, or what he liked to eat for
dinner, or who he trusted...the sort of info you get via human
interaction, the sort of info you do not get by waterboarding, the sort
of data you do get via effective practice of tradecraft.

Steve Doocey...he has a fan here. snerk

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 2:49 PM, KC wrote:
On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't worked so
far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the military has
done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat unique (I
think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a civilian
career
that eventually included owning and running a small company
consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly
efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me. Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special
privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I received
more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return during the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures are
more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal arts grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld (Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...



The anti-intellectualism expressed here by you righties is just frippin'
hilarious. Human intel gathering is best done by humans with liberal arts
educations. Of course, few of you even know what a liberal arts education
encompasses. Hell, most of you righties can't even follow a thread
without drifting way off course.

I was discussing our failures in human intel, *not* waving the flag for
the wonderful accomplishments of military personnel. Bilious Bill as
usual cannot follow any conversation without tripping over it. Fretwell
throws in neocons and their college majors, and, of course, the newsgroup
psychotic is off in outer space, as usual.

I'm not talking about photo interpretation, or about figuring out what
scientific data means...I'm talking about using knowledge of language,
history, personality analysis, cultural differences...the tools a field
agent uses to gather human intel. You know, the kind of stuff that
indicates where Osama might have been hiding, or what was on his mind, or
who he spoke with, or who he slept with, or what he liked to eat for
dinner, or who he trusted...the sort of info you get via human
interaction, the sort of info you do not get by waterboarding, the sort
of data you do get via effective practice of tradecraft.

Steve Doocey...he has a fan here. snerk

Seeing you are out of step with everyone here, except maybe JPS, maybe you
are under massive illusions.

On 9/3/2014 3:11 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 2:49 PM, KC wrote:
On 9/3/2014 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 10:42:29 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:

It was a response to your "Well, that might be the answer you mustered
out old military farts want,but it sure as hell hasn't worked so
far, has it?" comment.

Yes, it has worked. Our policies may be flawed but the military has
done
everything asked of it and more.

Off the subject, but I often reflect on my military time and
compare it
to my career as a civilian. My experiences are somewhat unique (I
think)
in the respect that I was military for the first 11 years of my adult
life before ditching the uniform for a suit and tie in a civilian
career
that eventually included owning and running a small company
consisting of about 100 people.

Contrary to what you may think, the US military is incredibly
efficient.
The schools, equipment and methodology used to train people with no
previously acquired skills or formal education still amazes me. Unlike
the civilian world there are no office politics, no special
privileges to
a select few. It is a true, equal opportunity employer with
"opportunity" underscored. I've said many times that I received
more in
knowledge, education and experience than I gave in return during the 9
years of active duty and 2 years in the reserves.

Most of our failures regards the military and perceived failures are
more
likely to be followed back to some liberal arts grad, who went in to
politics. And told the military what to do do and micro managed the
military. How many of LBJ and his advisors were not liberal arts
grads?

Yeah Harry loves those liberal arts majors, like Rumsfeld (Princeton
BA PoliSci) Cheney (Univ Wyoming MA in PoliSci) Wolfowitz (Univ
Chicago BA PoliSci) GW Bush (Yale BA History) GHW Bush (Yale BA
economics)


Harry went to Yale with them and thinks he has come a lot further and
touched more lives than any of them... kind of like the way he bitches
about Steve Doocey, one of the most liked guys in TV...



The anti-intellectualism expressed here by you righties is just frippin'
hilarious. Human intel gathering is best done by humans with liberal
arts educations. Of course, few of you even know what a liberal arts
education encompasses. Hell, most of you righties can't even follow a
thread without drifting way off course.

I was discussing our failures in human intel, *not* waving the flag for
the wonderful accomplishments of military personnel. Bilious Bill as
usual cannot follow any conversation without tripping over it. Fretwell
throws in neocons and their college majors, and, of course, the
newsgroup psychotic is off in outer space, as usual.

I'm not talking about photo interpretation, or about figuring out what
scientific data means...I'm talking about using knowledge of language,
history, personality analysis, cultural differences...the tools a field
agent uses to gather human intel. You know, the kind of stuff that
indicates where Osama might have been hiding, or what was on his mind,
or who he spoke with, or who he slept with, or what he liked to eat for
dinner, or who he trusted...the sort of info you get via human
interaction, the sort of info you do not get by waterboarding, the sort
of data you do get via effective practice of tradecraft.



this is funny as hell.

In article ,
says...


I just think the psychological effect of drones is the opposite of
what we want.

It has a tremendous effect on morale. "Caliphate" is a joke.
These criminals can't build a palace. All they can do is hide.
The U.S. has put a target on their backs. And rightly so.

We act like there is some kind of Yamamoto out there that will
seriously degrade their capability if we kill him.

Yamamoto had a target on his back.
The mission to kill him wasn't called "Operation Disrupt Japanese Hight
Command". He was already pretty much irrelevant.
It was named "Operation Vengeance"

The reality is the knowledge is pretty freely disseminated among the
gangs and there is no one single leader or mechanic who is key to the
operation. We only make martyrs. When we take out a bunch of
innocents, it is just a recruiting tool. I suppose we can just kill
them all but there is over a billion of them world wide


Leaders keep the gang together and set the "strategy".
ISIS could lay down their arms now, and the beheader and leaders
are still dead men. That's what vengeance is about.
I have no problem with that.

No I don't have a good answer but neither does our government.

There is no "military answer" except to kill them.
Vengeance.
Of course some might want them tried first, but not me.

On 9/3/2014 2:49 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/3/14 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:02:54 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Unfortunately these drone strikes are not nearly as surgical as the
government would have you believe. We are creating far more militants
than we kill.

And far less than troops on the ground. Pick your poison.

I just think the psychological effect of drones is the opposite of
what we want.
We act like there is some kind of Yamamoto out there that will
seriously degrade their capability if we kill him.
The reality is the knowledge is pretty freely disseminated among the
gangs and there is no one single leader or mechanic who is key to the
operation. We only make martyrs. When we take out a bunch of
innocents, it is just a recruiting tool. I suppose we can just kill
them all but there is over a billion of them world wide


That is correct. Having the biggest, baddest military in the world is
not relevant anymore.


Why is Russia spending whatever it can on revitalizing and expanding
it's military?

Why is China investing heavily into an expanded and modern Navy and Air
Force?