Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default Sad world

On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.



ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?


  #2   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2013
Posts: 6,605
Default Sad world

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.



ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?


Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.
--
Posted from my iPhone
  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2014
Posts: 580
Default Sad world

On 9/2/2014 6:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.



ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?


Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


We served our time. Now it's your turn.
  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default Sad world

On 9/2/2014 7:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.



ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?


Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


Your attempt at humor escapes me tonight.

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.
  #5   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2013
Posts: 6,605
Default Sad world

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 7:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.


ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?


Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


Your attempt at humor escapes me tonight.

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.


Do the ISIS fellas wear special armbands?
--
Posted from my iPhone


  #6   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default Sad world

On 9/2/2014 8:34 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 7:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them. Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies. Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet. Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town. If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already), you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts. The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.


ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?

Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


Your attempt at humor escapes me tonight.

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.


Do the ISIS fellas wear special armbands?


Plenty of Iraqi's will be pointing them out.


  #7   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,524
Default Sad world

On 9/2/14 9:19 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 8:34 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 7:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them.
Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion
against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading
journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast
against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies.
Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet.
Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They
might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town.
If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already),
you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts.
The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose
towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are
ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than
providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's
going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they
survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US
armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA
needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia
and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United
States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.


ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the same if
they behead her as well?

Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground
there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


Your attempt at humor escapes me tonight.

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.


Do the ISIS fellas wear special armbands?


Plenty of Iraqi's will be pointing them out.




As we learned during Dubya's wars, Iraqis and Afhanis will point anyone
out and we'lll believe them because we want to believe them.
  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default Sad world

On 9/2/2014 9:28 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 9:19 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 8:34 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 7:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/2/2014 4:24 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/2/14 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:26:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:04:09 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
ISIL has reportedly beheaded another American journalist.

Says they do not care what the world thinks about them.
Makes them
even
scarier to a sane person.

===

Yes but it will also make it easier to marshall world opinion
against
them. No civilized society goeas around beheading
journalists. They
are not exactly an invincible force if everyone stands fast
against
them. Somewhere they have a source of funding and supplies.
Without
that they could not last long. If nothing else it should be
relatively easy to kill their telecom, media and internet.
Where do
they go after that, carrier pigeons?

I like the line from "Alien".

"Nuke them from orbit"


Unfortunately, we didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam and we
didn't
learn from the Russian disaster in Afghanistan. These modern-day
terrorists have no real hometown or territory anymore. They
might take a
town for a while, and then they'll give it up for another town.
If you
bomb the town into the stone age (where it probably is already),
you end
up killing lots of non-combatants and you make lots of converts.
The
only real way to fight these guys is to have the folks whose
towns they
take over fight back. But then you don't know what you are
ending up
with.




Unfortunately air strikes alone won't help much other than
providing a
minor moral booster to those locals willing to fight, IMO. It's
going
to require "boots on the ground" at some point.

Many "expert" commentators claim the USA lacks the "stomach" for a
serious, boots on the ground retaliation. I'd suggest they
survey those
who would actually do the fighting ... namely members of the US
armed
forces. I'll bet the answer would be unanimous.

Ideally it should be a multi-national coalition, but the USA
needs to
lead the way.




Boot on the ground was a failed policy in Afghanistan for Russia
and the
United States, and it was a failed policy in Iraq for the United
States.
Toppling Saddam only made Iraq worse than it was.


ISIL is holding an American female captive. Will you feel the
same if
they behead her as well?

Yes. We're not going to beat ISIS with American boots on the ground
there
unless we can send Herring, Bertie and FlatulentJim.


Your attempt at humor escapes me tonight.

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.

Do the ISIS fellas wear special armbands?


Plenty of Iraqi's will be pointing them out.




As we learned during Dubya's wars, Iraqis and Afhanis will point anyone
out and we'lll believe them because we want to believe them.



Too bad. That's the way it goes.

  #10   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default Sad world

On 9/3/2014 11:18 AM, 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.



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.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Welcome in my world ! crackTOPmms General 0 August 13th 11 07:09 PM
7 y/o to attempt world's youngest round-the-world sailing record Frank D'Arcy General 1 June 19th 10 08:32 PM
End of the World Frogwatch[_2_] General 3 July 20th 09 10:16 PM
It's the end of the world.... Short Wave Sportfishing General 0 September 13th 04 11:39 AM
Cruising World/Sailing World Hoges in WA Cruising 6 September 7th 04 10:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017