Reply With Quote
Seriously, it's in an earlier post.
In this thread.
I'm not joking.
It had already been answered before you even asked. You're just not intelligent enough to figure it out. Not my problem.
Seriously, it's in an earlier post.
In this thread.
I'm not joking.
Seriously, you haven't answered my question with a yes or a no.
It's only 2 or 3 letters. It's not hard.
I'm not joking.
I'll give you a hint Snakeboy.
I agree that this is a critical opportunity to help turn Pakistan into a real ally in the war on terror, and we should be spending more to help aid and rebuild Pakistan than we do to bomb it.
Figure it out yet?
Just waiting for the 2 or 3 letters from you. Then I can explain to you and General Petraeus.
Dude...you're taking the Rick Perry approach to debating.
If you don't have the basic skills to discern my position on the OP when it has been spelled out for you more than once, you certainly won't have anything intelligent to say about counterinsurgency strategy.
I'm not debating. Just waiting for CD to answer yes or no but he's afraid to do so.
Already did. I'll quote it again.It's ok that you can't figure it out. It's good to know one's limits.
Aww Chump, you should just give in. I'm curious to see Snakeboy use his vast technical knowledge and hands-on expertise to dismantle our current counter-insurgency methods.
Here's your question:You didn't say is was a yes or no question when you asked it.
Here is your answer:
Now you are admitting you are too stupid to remember what your own question was.
Don't be scared, it's only 2 or 3 letters.
The answer was always yes. Sorry you were afraid to read.
You're a spectacular idiot.
Good boy.
Because me making you do what I want you to do on an internet forum has nothing to do with the war on terror. Thanks for playing, pumpkin.
You made the assumption that my answer to Chump's second question has anything to do with counter insurgency methods. I threw some stupid bait onto 2 "muslim" threads just to get Chump to respond for my own amusement. He's a good predictable boy.
Since you're curious though, I make no claims to technical knowledge of counter insurgency methods. Although since I have already said multiple times on this forum that I believe we should stop occupying Afghanistan it should be easy for you to see that I don't believe any of the counter insurgeny experts are correct and that ultimately they will fail. I also don't subscribe to RG's belief that Iraq is a wonderful success that should be emulated. I think 10 years from now we will look a Iraq and failure will be the only accurate description.
I agree that we probably shouldn't have invaded Iraq or Afghanistan on a wide-spread scale. I think the question, though, was now that we ARE involved, what is the best way to move forward from this point and produce a positive outcome? If you think the best answer would be to leave Afghanistan ASAP, that's cool.
I also think the premise was using the point that building long-term items (schools, churches, etc) is a better way to spend money than to do so on hunting down terrorists, because the former will provide better long-term goals (such as preventing more terrorism, getting the local populace to side with us rather than the terrorists because we are providing them goods/services, etc etc).
did RG suggest that iraq is a success?
i didn't see it.
Ok, so you're basically a troll now. Thanks for clearing that up.
lol he's not saying that iraq is a success.
he is likely referring to the money surge.
Sometimes on this forum. I participate in a number of forums. I take them for what they are.
Damn, you're naive.
Maybe you and Chump should take this campaign to Karachi.
jesus darrin, is there no end to your stupidity?
Does it bother you that someone would ask Chump the same question over and over?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions