It was pretty much just the generic 4 year ba's with no particular
usefulness that ended up as butter bars leading packs of 11 boom booms.
A decent engineering degree got you off the hook for that snafu.

The two wars had something else in common too, they are both about us
trying to force people we do not even understand to behave the way we
think they should.

wrote:
On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:35:32 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

That is not true at all. College guys were more likely to get a
commission and the average lifespan of a 2d lT in Vietnam was measured
in hours.

Due to heavier dependence on technology, it may not be possible or sensible
to compare the two wars.

Both wars had one thing in common. A low tech car bomb or other
improvised explosive device will still kill you.

"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
ups.com...

The two wars had something else in common too, they are both about us
trying to force people we do not even understand to behave the way we
think they should.


Not even close to the same thing.

The war we are fighting today is much bigger, global and much more of a
direct threat to the citizens of this country. Iraq happens to be a staging
ground right now because there is no unified enemy in a central location.
Being in Iraq happens to draw them into sight and within range because we
can't be everywhere at once. The enemy is spread out throughout the world
and functions as an extremist religious sect. As time wears on we may see
some radical changes in the organization of our defense and military ....
smaller groups deployed in many areas. But that type of change is
monumental in scope and will take many years to accomplish.

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago . The
"soldiers" are taught from birth that there is no such thing as negotiation,
diplomacy or compromise. Non-believers that will not convert are to die,
period, until there are none left, all in the service of Allah.

I am somewhat amazed and concerned that many treat this war as a remotely
controlled issue that really does not threaten or otherwise concern us,
other than being newsworthy and a subject of political debate. 9/11 was far
from being the first attack and Bin Laden is only one of many who lead their
crusade. When old men in wheelchairs are pushed overboard on a cruise ship
or innocent civilians have their heads loped off while begging for mercy
(video at 11) it is hard for me to not support the actions taken, errors
and all, by our government. What other choice is there? Negotiations?
With whom? Surrender and convert?

This day has been coming for 20 years. Now it's here.

One of the long standing policies of this nation was recently changed; that
being the use of pre-emptive action to avoid loss of lives. In view of this
kind of enemy, I couldn't agree more.

The threat to our nation and to our future generations is very real and
serious I am afraid. It is our responsibility to do something about it, as
painful as it may be. And, as has been said, it is not going to be easy.

Eisboch

I had no idea you had this total nut job streak in you. Impressive.

Eisboch wrote:
"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
ups.com...

The two wars had something else in common too, they are both about us
trying to force people we do not even understand to behave the way we
think they should.


Not even close to the same thing.

The war we are fighting today is much bigger, global and much more of a
direct threat to the citizens of this country. Iraq happens to be a staging
ground right now because there is no unified enemy in a central location.
Being in Iraq happens to draw them into sight and within range because we
can't be everywhere at once. The enemy is spread out throughout the world
and functions as an extremist religious sect. As time wears on we may see
some radical changes in the organization of our defense and military ....
smaller groups deployed in many areas. But that type of change is
monumental in scope and will take many years to accomplish.

A holy war, but still a war was declared on the US many years ago . The
"soldiers" are taught from birth that there is no such thing as negotiation,
diplomacy or compromise. Non-believers that will not convert are to die,
period, until there are none left, all in the service of Allah.

I am somewhat amazed and concerned that many treat this war as a remotely
controlled issue that really does not threaten or otherwise concern us,
other than being newsworthy and a subject of political debate. 9/11 was far
from being the first attack and Bin Laden is only one of many who lead their
crusade. When old men in wheelchairs are pushed overboard on a cruise ship
or innocent civilians have their heads loped off while begging for mercy
(video at 11) it is hard for me to not support the actions taken, errors
and all, by our government. What other choice is there? Negotiations?
With whom? Surrender and convert?

This day has been coming for 20 years. Now it's here.

One of the long standing policies of this nation was recently changed; that
being the use of pre-emptive action to avoid loss of lives. In view of this
kind of enemy, I couldn't agree more.

The threat to our nation and to our future generations is very real and
serious I am afraid. It is our responsibility to do something about it, as
painful as it may be. And, as has been said, it is not going to be easy.

Eisboch

"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
oups.com...

I had no idea you had this total nut job streak in you. Impressive.


Thanks. I try.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
The war we are fighting today is much bigger, global and much more of a
direct threat to the citizens of this country. Iraq happens to be a
staging ground right now because there is no unified enemy in a central
location. Being in Iraq happens to draw them into sight and within range
because we can't be everywhere at once. The enemy is spread out
throughout the world and functions as an extremist religious sect. As
time wears on we may see some radical changes in the organization of our
defense and military .... smaller groups deployed in many areas. But that
type of change is monumental in scope and will take many years to
accomplish.


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.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

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

I hope so, because they certainly were idiotic for the most part!

"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.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"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.

I've heard a few interviews with military people who've been in Iraq. Some
of these guys sounded like they really would rather we had never gone to
Iraq. I don't think the overall strategy came from the military. It came
from people like Paul Wolfowitz, who none of us ever voted for. The real
problem is that people behind the scenes are able to get to the president
with insane ideas. Consider the stupidity of the domino theory, for example.
Its authors later recanted that nonsense.



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've never had issues with such methods, as long as they're not used to
eliminate people who simply have a label we don't like, like "leftists" in
South America. There are people in our government who know the difference
between an annoyance and a threat. If only we had a manager who knew how to
act upon threats, we'd be in much better shape.

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

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
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

:-) Not having a boat....where have I heard THAT before? I'm emailing youse
3 beers.