John Kerry strikes again..
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:22:16 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:13:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago .

I believe the holy war really started when we didn't go home after the
100 hour war in Kuwait like we said we would. THREE presidents had the
chance, none did.

I heard an interesting talk show last night, with Joseph Wilson (the
ambassador) as the guest. His ideas will enrage the faithful, but that's
to be expected. But, I was pleased to hear one of my own ideas (#1)
backed
up by someone who had more information than I do.

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

2) Although our focus was the no-fly zone, there was virtually NO part
of
Iraq where ANY aircraft could've taken off without our knowing about it.

3) Saddam was, in fact, hiding something very important before we
invaded.
He was concealing how little he had, in terms of WMDs. Why did he do
this?
Two reasons: First, he had to keep Iran wondering, in case they decided
to
pull any stunts during what they perceived to be a time of Iraqi
weakness.
Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal support was
slowly but surely unraveling.

4) "He didn't conform to U.N. blah blah....": Wilson's comment on this
was
twofold. It took us 50 years to win the Cold War. We were patient enough
to work for that long, with a threat that was real, and horrific. The
only
reason Bush pulled the trigger is that the plan was in the works long
before 9/11.


Interesting, but I noticed an apparent contradiction:

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

3) ..... Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal
support
was
slowly but surely unraveling.

Eisboch


Quit being realistic!

Nobody really expected you to understand this, John. This is why you were
never recruited into the diplomatic service. Much too complex.

John Kerry strikes again..
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 03:24:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

I am curious. How did you get "snagged" by the Navy? To my knowledge the
Army was the only service that was drafting anybody.

I was in the recruiters office trying to join the Coast Guard. The
Navy grabbed me after I took all the tests and made me an offer. It
ended up really being a convoluted deal before it was over



Ah ... I misunderstood your use of the word "snagged".

I was young, in college and bored out of my mind. I finally quit and got a
job working for Boston Whaler. Shortly thereafter I received my
"Greetings" letter and immediately headed for the Navy recruitment center.

Eisboch

John Kerry strikes again..
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 13:40:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:13:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago .

I believe the holy war really started when we didn't go home after the
100 hour war in Kuwait like we said we would. THREE presidents had the
chance, none did.

I heard an interesting talk show last night, with Joseph Wilson (the
ambassador) as the guest. His ideas will enrage the faithful, but that's
to
be expected. But, I was pleased to hear one of my own ideas (#1) backed up
by someone who had more information than I do.

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

2) Although our focus was the no-fly zone, there was virtually NO part of
Iraq where ANY aircraft could've taken off without our knowing about it.

3) Saddam was, in fact, hiding something very important before we invaded.
He was concealing how little he had, in terms of WMDs. Why did he do this?
Two reasons: First, he had to keep Iran wondering, in case they decided to
pull any stunts during what they perceived to be a time of Iraqi weakness.
Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal support was
slowly but surely unraveling.

4) "He didn't conform to U.N. blah blah....": Wilson's comment on this was
twofold. It took us 50 years to win the Cold War. We were patient enough
to
work for that long, with a threat that was real, and horrific. The only
reason Bush pulled the trigger is that the plan was in the works long
before
9/11.



You have to remember the "no fly zones" were already a war. We bombed
Iraq virtually every day and were racking up a pretty good civillian
death toll. Most of the west had abandoned us long before we invaded.
Our occupation of arab land and killing people was the main
justification for the terrorism throughout the 90s.


What I recall hearing is about our bombing lots of anti-aircraft radar
installations when they turned them on and tried to target our aircraft. If
there were civilians working in those places, they knew the risks, just as
our civilians know the risks of working in such places. And, during the time
of enforcement, I seem to recall our losing something less than a dozen
personnel.

What's your point?

John Kerry strikes again..
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 03:24:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

I am curious. How did you get "snagged" by the Navy? To my knowledge
the
Army was the only service that was drafting anybody.

I was in the recruiters office trying to join the Coast Guard. The
Navy grabbed me after I took all the tests and made me an offer. It
ended up really being a convoluted deal before it was over



Ah ... I misunderstood your use of the word "snagged".

I was young, in college and bored out of my mind. I finally quit and got
a job working for Boston Whaler. Shortly thereafter I received my
"Greetings" letter and immediately headed for the Navy recruitment center.

Eisboch


I was working my way through college doing 1/2 time. So not enough units to
get a deferment. Draft notice went to the wrong address as mom had
remarried. Decided the AF was a better deal late 1964 early 1965.

John Kerry strikes again..
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:23:39 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

What I recall hearing is about our bombing lots of anti-aircraft radar
installations when they turned them on and tried to target our aircraft.
If
there were civilians working in those places, they knew the risks, just as
our civilians know the risks of working in such places. And, during the
time
of enforcement, I seem to recall our losing something less than a dozen
personnel.

Saddam put these installations in civillian aras. We blew the **** out
of them anyway.
Go look at some of the old stories coming out of the German, Italian
and French press during the 90s.
"What you recall hearing" is not what most of the world was saying. We
had better spin control in the 90s than we have today. For some reason
the American media and the liberal establishment was ignoring the
European press when they criticised our bombing war.

So....what's your point? It still wasn't a total free-for-all as it is now.
Even our military contractors loved it - the perfect situation for testing
anything they came up with, and stay ahead of whatever Saddam's people aimed
at us.

John Kerry strikes again..
 

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:00:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .


Kerry should have said, "I apologize to the troops in Iraq for making a
statement which implied their education was lacking. I meant to say Bush
was lacking in his."

Amen, case closed, nothing more need be said. He didn't need to say all
the
crap he did, just as you don't need to defend his crap.

John? Is that you?


Good guess.

John Kerry strikes again..
 

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:21:10 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:22:16 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:13:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago .

I believe the holy war really started when we didn't go home after the
100 hour war in Kuwait like we said we would. THREE presidents had the
chance, none did.

I heard an interesting talk show last night, with Joseph Wilson (the
ambassador) as the guest. His ideas will enrage the faithful, but that's
to be expected. But, I was pleased to hear one of my own ideas (#1)
backed
up by someone who had more information than I do.

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

2) Although our focus was the no-fly zone, there was virtually NO part
of
Iraq where ANY aircraft could've taken off without our knowing about it.

3) Saddam was, in fact, hiding something very important before we
invaded.
He was concealing how little he had, in terms of WMDs. Why did he do
this?
Two reasons: First, he had to keep Iran wondering, in case they decided
to
pull any stunts during what they perceived to be a time of Iraqi
weakness.
Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal support was
slowly but surely unraveling.

4) "He didn't conform to U.N. blah blah....": Wilson's comment on this
was
twofold. It took us 50 years to win the Cold War. We were patient enough
to work for that long, with a threat that was real, and horrific. The
only
reason Bush pulled the trigger is that the plan was in the works long
before 9/11.


Interesting, but I noticed an apparent contradiction:

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

3) ..... Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal
support
was
slowly but surely unraveling.

Eisboch


Quit being realistic!

Nobody really expected you to understand this, John. This is why you were
never recruited into the diplomatic service. Much too complex.


Turn the recorder on so we can hear the music to which you're tap dancing!

John Kerry strikes again..
 

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:20:23 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 15:23:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:heWdnSCQAZKDYtTYnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@giganews. com...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:13:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago .

I believe the holy war really started when we didn't go home after the
100 hour war in Kuwait like we said we would. THREE presidents had the
chance, none did.

I heard an interesting talk show last night, with Joseph Wilson (the
ambassador) as the guest. His ideas will enrage the faithful, but
that's
to be expected. But, I was pleased to hear one of my own ideas (#1)
backed up by someone who had more information than I do.

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

2) Although our focus was the no-fly zone, there was virtually NO part
of
Iraq where ANY aircraft could've taken off without our knowing about
it.

3) Saddam was, in fact, hiding something very important before we
invaded. He was concealing how little he had, in terms of WMDs. Why did
he do this? Two reasons: First, he had to keep Iran wondering, in case
they decided to pull any stunts during what they perceived to be a time
of Iraqi weakness. Second, to keep his own people wondering, because
internal support was slowly but surely unraveling.

4) "He didn't conform to U.N. blah blah....": Wilson's comment on this
was twofold. It took us 50 years to win the Cold War. We were patient
enough to work for that long, with a threat that was real, and
horrific.
The only reason Bush pulled the trigger is that the plan was in the
works
long before 9/11.


Interesting, but I noticed an apparent contradiction:

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

3) ..... Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal
support was
slowly but surely unraveling.

Eisboch

Not necessarily a contradiction. Causing his support to unravel MAY have
been our doing, through covert means. It's the coolest, most manly-man way
of dealing with such a situation. We won't really know until the history
books are written.


At least, that's what Brian Williams would have said. He's also a great
believer in the use of the word 'may'.

Why does it matter? First of all, it's the job of the covert agencies to
maintain an endless web of doubt about their work. If they did otherwise,
you would not like it, and neither would I. And second, does it matter why
Saddam's support was beginning to fall apart? It's what we wanted. It all
would've revolved around dollars in the right places. Doesn't matter where
the dollars come from.


Tippity tappity, tippity tappity...

John Kerry strikes again..
 

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 14:19:50 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:23:39 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

What I recall hearing is about our bombing lots of anti-aircraft radar
installations when they turned them on and tried to target our aircraft. If
there were civilians working in those places, they knew the risks, just as
our civilians know the risks of working in such places. And, during the time
of enforcement, I seem to recall our losing something less than a dozen
personnel.

Saddam put these installations in civillian aras. We blew the **** out
of them anyway.
Go look at some of the old stories coming out of the German, Italian
and French press during the 90s.
"What you recall hearing" is not what most of the world was saying. We
had better spin control in the 90s than we have today. For some reason
the American media and the liberal establishment was ignoring the
European press when they criticised our bombing war.

Not to be disagreeable, but I find it extremely hard to believe the
American (major) media and the liberal establishment would ignore articles
which were derogatory of the United States.

John Kerry strikes again..
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:20:23 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 15:23:14 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
news:heWdnSCQAZKDYtTYnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@giganews .com...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:13:03 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago .

I believe the holy war really started when we didn't go home after
the
100 hour war in Kuwait like we said we would. THREE presidents had
the
chance, none did.

I heard an interesting talk show last night, with Joseph Wilson (the
ambassador) as the guest. His ideas will enrage the faithful, but
that's
to be expected. But, I was pleased to hear one of my own ideas (#1)
backed up by someone who had more information than I do.

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

2) Although our focus was the no-fly zone, there was virtually NO
part
of
Iraq where ANY aircraft could've taken off without our knowing about
it.

3) Saddam was, in fact, hiding something very important before we
invaded. He was concealing how little he had, in terms of WMDs. Why
did
he do this? Two reasons: First, he had to keep Iran wondering, in
case
they decided to pull any stunts during what they perceived to be a
time
of Iraqi weakness. Second, to keep his own people wondering, because
internal support was slowly but surely unraveling.

4) "He didn't conform to U.N. blah blah....": Wilson's comment on
this
was twofold. It took us 50 years to win the Cold War. We were patient
enough to work for that long, with a threat that was real, and
horrific.
The only reason Bush pulled the trigger is that the plan was in the
works
long before 9/11.


Interesting, but I noticed an apparent contradiction:

1) Before the invasion, the region was as stable as anyone could have
possibly made it. We blew it.

3) ..... Second, to keep his own people wondering, because internal
support was
slowly but surely unraveling.

Eisboch

Not necessarily a contradiction. Causing his support to unravel MAY have
been our doing, through covert means. It's the coolest, most manly-man
way
of dealing with such a situation. We won't really know until the history
books are written.


At least, that's what Brian Williams would have said. He's also a great
believer in the use of the word 'may'.

Why does it matter? First of all, it's the job of the covert agencies to
maintain an endless web of doubt about their work. If they did otherwise,
you would not like it, and neither would I. And second, does it matter why
Saddam's support was beginning to fall apart? It's what we wanted. It all
would've revolved around dollars in the right places. Doesn't matter where
the dollars come from.


Tippity tappity, tippity tappity...

Address the issue, expert.