Our Troops Must Stay

[101A]

101A, under 200 posts, is the emotional/hate temperature taker as well as self-appointed scolder and feel-good pollyanna, which is a lot more fun than posting serious substance.

Because post count on SpursTalk is such a barometer for what type of posts to make.

You statement is baseless, by the way.

You are the only one I have called a hater.

Let me know when you post something of substance, or come up with any ideas of your own, instead of simply tearing down everything you don't agree with.

You are a parrot of the radical wing of the Democratic party. You are straight party-line in your opinions, and intellectually empty.

You debate without wit or intelligence, you insult, ridicule, condemn and whine. You are an immature simpleton; a lightweight.

You somehow define your success by the number of people you can piss off and chase out of a thread, and also, as pitiful as it might be, apparently by the number of posts you have ac ulated on this forum.

Sad.

[101A]

Time magazine Baghdad bureau chief Michael Ware on Morning Sedition this morning:



atrios.Blogspot

That's an interesting quote, and I certainly am not above believing Lieberman could be spinning.

(This is without sarcasm - actual questions, NBADan)
But to what end?
What does JL stand to gain by supporting the troops staying, when the base, and especially the people he needs support from to get the nomination, are wholeheartedly against the position he is taken, as are, apparently now, most of the United States population, if we are to believe most of the polling data being reported.

Is he going to change to the Republican party, or start a deluded war-crazy Hawk party? Why would he spin it this way?

[boutons]

dubya and WH is now getting the military to blame itself for failing to communicate how excellent Iraq is really going. Sounds like Pace was chosen to be Chief Spinner of JCOS.

So few people believe any of them now. They should just STFU and get the job done, rather than trying to spin the story into something else.

=========================

The New York Times
December 1, 2005

Pace: Message of Iraq Progress Stymied
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 6:04 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- If the American public has a distorted picture of the combat readiness of Iraqi troops, the U.S. military is largely to blame for it, the most senior American military officer said Thursday.

''We have done ourselves a disservice in the way that we have defined how we are tracking the progress of Iraqi forces,'' Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told an audience of military and civilian students at the National Defense University.

It was his first public speech focusing on Iraq since he became Joint Chiefs chairman on Oct. 1, and his remarks came one day after President Bush outlined his administration's strategy for achieving victory in Iraq.

Pace was among several senior officials who spoke publicly Thursday about the strategy for winning in Iraq. Eric Edelman, the under secretary of defense for policy, was speaking to members of the Council on Foreign Relations, along with Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, the senior assistant to Pace.

Edelman, whose predecessor, Douglas J. Feith, was considered one of the architects of the Iraq war, said senior U.S. military commanders told him on a recent visit to Iraq that they are very optimistic about stabilizing the country.

''Overall, when one considers the challenges that the Iraqis face -- not least that of overcoming the political and social effects of 3 1/2 decades of monstrous tyranny -- what is most impressive is not how much remains for them to do, but rather how far they have come in less than three years,'' Edelman said in remarks prepared for delivery.

An important element of Bush's strategy is building Iraqi security forces that can defend the country on their own.

Pace said the U.S. military's own means of measuring progress in training Iraqi forces have created confusion in some quarters.

''In an attempt to be very precise with ourselves, to give ourselves metrics that we could all understand, we have done ourselves and everyone who is listening to us a disservice,'' he added.

Pace made the remark after mentioning that people often ask him, ''How can there be only one -- count them -- only one Iraqi battalion capable of independent operations?''

He was referring to the public stir that arose when Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told Congress in September that the number of Iraqi army battalions rated at ''level one'' proficiency -- meaning capable of combat with no U.S. support -- had dropped from three to one. Some interpreted that as evidence the Iraqis were regressing.

Pace indicated that Iraqi units do not have to reach ''level one'' proficiency to be capable of fighting the insurgency, and said that even some battalions in the American military would be rated below ''level 1.''

He cited his own experience as a Marine battalion commander from 1983-85 and noted that his unit was reliant on either the Navy or the Air Force to transport it to the battle front and that if required to remain in combat for more than 60 days, his battalion had to rely on the Army for resupplying.

''So if you asked me then to grade my own battalion on a piece of paper as far as level one, level two, level three, level four, I would have to put level two,'' he said. ''Why? Because I'm very capable but I do need some outside help.''

Pace's point was that even though only one Iraqi battalion is rated at ''level one,'' there are nearly 40 rated at ''level one,'' which is defined as capable of taking a lead role in fighting the insurgency with some degree of U.S. support. About 80 others battalions at rated at ''level three,'' meaning that are capable of fighting, but with U.S. troops in the lead.

* Copyright 2005 The Associated Press

[jochhejaam]

[QUOTE][QUOTE=FromWayDowntown

You still don't understand my point. My effort to explain my comment to you is distracting from the substantive discussion in the thread. I'd try one more time, but that would create two more posts that others would have to skip over to get to the real discussion. [/QUOTE] I understood your point. Actually by posting this you've created the two they now have to skip. You're the one who posted the "I should join the lemming parade and parrot those raving about how wonderful this President is" comment and you call that real discussion? My point is to leave that nonsensical sarcasm out of your posts if you want substantive dialogue.

What are you? The forum's rhetoric monitor? I'll hope to get a gold star from you some time in the future.

I can do that for ya if you'd like but you're going to have to earn it.

[Nbadan]

But to what end?
What does JL stand to gain by supporting the troops staying, when the base, and especially the people he needs support from to get the nomination, are wholeheartedly against the position he is taken, as are, apparently now, most of the United States population, if we are to believe most of the polling data being reported.

Is he going to change to the Republican party, or start a deluded war-crazy Hawk party? Why would he spin it this way?

Liebermann is a pro-war Neo-lib. He's no better than the NeoCons. He'd sell ya up the river without a paddle quicker than a Bush crony in Iraq. This is why I don't get about this 'blind party loyalty' bull which I am always criticized about. I hate some Democrats just as much as I hate some conservatives, but the Republicans have the power.

[gtownspur]

Liebermann is a pro-war Neo-lib. He's no better than the NeoCons. He'd sell ya up the river without a paddle quicker than a Bush crony in Iraq. This is why I don't get about this 'blind party loyalty' bull which I am always criticized about. I hate some Democrats just as much as I hate some conservatives, but the Republicans have the power.

Funny how you'd still vote for Hillary who has the same Iraq oppinions like Lieberman, and that she is pimpin you out for the moobat you are. But wasn't it a month ago that you said you admire hillary even though she's a sellout because she's doing it to gain power? Sorry NBA, i called your bluff.

I'm gonna pull a SA210 stunt and say that you basically hate Lieberman because he's a Jew and your a holocaust denier. Atleast i didn't curse.

Jew hater!

Holocaust denier!

[Nbadan]

Hardly. Jews are largely Democratic voters, and Hillary is the devil.

[Nbadan]

[gtownspur]

Hardly. Jews are largely Democratic voters, and Hillary is the devil.

Yeah i know. I was jj. , except for the Hillary part. I know you will vote for her in '08.

THe Jews are slowly going Gop though , and what's not to say that you jump for joy at every carbombing in a deli in Jerusalem?

Anyway back to my SA210 style rhetoric.

Your obviously full of hate. Your a hatemongerer and an anti american.

Jew burner.

[gtownspur]

Yeah that was Reagan's dumbest move ever. But he did not cower to Qaddafi though. And most of all, THe soviet Union was viewed as the real threat, and the lebanese were seen as just dogs.

[101A]

Liebermann is a pro-war Neo-lib. He's no better than the NeoCons. He'd sell ya up the river without a paddle quicker than a Bush crony in Iraq. This is why I don't get about this 'blind party loyalty' bull which I am always criticized about. I hate some Democrats just as much as I hate some conservatives, but the Republicans have the power.

So you're saying he's actually (as a pro-war Neo-Lib) being honest about his actual pos ion - and he is not spinning?

Because the original piece cited "spinning".

[SA210]

Yeah i know. I was jj. , except for the Hillary part. I know you will vote for her in '08.

THe Jews are slowly going Gop though , and what's not to say that you jump for joy at every carbombing in a deli in Jerusalem?

Anyway back to my SA210 style rhetoric.

Your obviously full of hate. Your a hatemongerer and an anti american.

Jew burner.

Actually to try and copy my style, you'd have to actually have some compassion.

[gtownspur]

Yes compassion, with a dash of rainbow and skittles, sugar and e and everything nice.


HEy SA210, are you a female?

[SA210]

Yes compassion, with a dash of rainbow and skittles, sugar and e and everything nice.


HEy SA210, are you a female?

Hey Gtown, usually men who call other men females alot are usually the ones that are very insecure about themselves and their own sexuality. Seems you have some hidden secrets and might be in the closet and even angry about a thing or two.

Why do rainbows come to your mind? Skittles? Sugar and e? How do you really feel inside Gtown? Are you gay? It's ok actually. No need to hide it.

Come out the SpursTalk closet. Don't be afraid. It's the holidays. Have a gay ol' time. I think everyone here will accept you, never fear.

[smeagol]

Yes compassion, with a dash of rainbow and skittles, sugar and e and everything nice.


HEy SA210, are you a female?

[gtownspur]

Hey Gtown, usually men who call other men females alot are usually the ones that are very insecure about themselves and their own sexuality. Seems you have some hidden secrets and might be in the closet and even angry about a thing or two.

Why do rainbows come to your mind? Skittles? Sugar and e? How do you really feel inside Gtown? Are you gay? It's ok actually. No need to hide it.

Come out the SpursTalk closet. Don't be afraid. It's the holidays. Have a gay ol' time. I think everyone here will accept you, never fear.

No, sorry. I'm not gay, and not available to help you pick out a good nail tech or the latest fashions on the weekends. Maybe you were excited to find a freind to help you with your makeover? Who knows?

No, my question was not based on your viewpoints, just your comments. You like to point out how your caring, passionate, loving, and full of love and anyone else who disagrees with you is full of hate. And you try to come out like Miss USA when after you level putdowns at somebody. You also do abunch of these , all the time.

I never thought you were even a man, much less gay. I just had a hunch that you were probably a woman since arguing with you is like arguing with my freinds girlfreind who levels the same type of comments consisting of "well your just insecure about yourself that's why you're so macho this macho that..blah blah blah".

[SA210]

is for your forever talk about things you know nothing about. I didn't know you had to be a woman to care about ppl or issues. I didn't say ppl who disagree with me are full of hate. I said YOU say hateful things and alot of time talk from hate. Just cuz you lose an arguement, you shouldn't try to label me with "everyone". I said, YOU.

I only mentioned how caring I am because you don't care about the poor and you criticized me for it. And just because I point out how insecure you are doesn't reflect anything on me except for clarifying why your so bothered by anythying you see as feminized or caring, or of a woman, or what you percieve to be female characteristics. Says alot about you.

[gtownspur]

^Doesn't say much about anyone. All i'm saying is you whine like a you know what, and you put yourself on a pedestal. I cannot discuss anything with you because the first thing you do is label my viewpoint and then say i'm hateful. You know nothing personally about me, and if you think you won an argument, fine. If your the score keeper when it comes to those silly things, then go ahead and blow hot air and lift your already inflated ego.

First of all, your wrong that i hate poor people, cuz trust me it takes alot to hate someone. Second, i don't criticize your efforts to help them, and besides that's a cheapshot because i've given you props for doing so.

Also you said..

I didn't know you had to be a woman to care about ppl or issues....

You see. I just finished in the previous post why i came to the conclusion that you might be female. And that was because of your style of reaction and rhetoric and had nothing to do with you viewpoint. , Spurswoman is female, but she doesn't agree with what you say. But this is all useless to you anyways since i know you'll go on repeating of how i label you because of your compassion and love for people, which is false. And when you do i will post this paragraph to show how much you lack in comprehension.

This is a forum and anything goes. As far as i know you could be a child molester, theif or a two dollar . Who knows? Especially since we're online and we can't see face to face.

And if you want to know, yes,.. you are so caring in effect that if your were to argue quantum physics with a MIT proffessor, you'd win simply because you have so much compassion.:vomit

[SA210]

Funny how you try to sound different in what you say now, from other things you have said. Nothing has changed. Say what you want, we can both argue about you being gay or me having female-like comments. You can try and label me for your hope that others will follow and label me the same. Back and forth and back and forth, try all your spin, all your tactics. I'm compassionate, you're not, you hate the poor or you don't, doesn't matter. Because after all your baloney and wisecracks and immature comments, the truth remains,

You know absolutely nothing about poor people or what it's like to be poor at all, whatsoever, even if your life depended on it. Period. Nothing changes that.

Spin that any way you want.

[gtownspur]

^keep talking Beauty queen. , I'm not going to change your mind.

Anything i say will be processed in your brain as "I think welfare reform is a good solution because---Hatred! HATred! hatred!, I hate JEws and poor orphans, burn in an oven you hebrew!!!!!!!!!"

So even if i tried hard to convince you to open up to a different point of view, you're too nutty. ANd who gives a damn if you were a female, you don't consider that to be slanderous do you? After all you can ask me if i'm gay, since it would mean the world to you if i was, but you'd be dissapointed and i'd have nothing to be defensive about. I ask you if your a woman, and you get all bonkers. So as far as insecurity, you know jack . And how can you say i know nothing about poor people, you don't know anything about me and i don't try to analyze your past experiences or try to write them for you. Maybe that serves your purpose, but you will not convince anyone by telling them they're full of hatred. If anything your full of many things yourself, as i don't have to make up stuff about you, people can decide themselves by your posts.

[SA210]

^^^ all those words, and it all meant nothing. you still know nuthin about it.

[gtownspur]

^^^ all those words, and it all meant nothing. you still know nuthin about it.

, you're sad and you just don't know it girl.

[Crookshanks]

Last I heard, war plans and strategies are highly classified. Why do some of you think the President and Rumsfeld should share those plans with the American people?

I'm sure the President and the Pentagon have plans for their exit strategy - they just aren't stupid enough to reveal them to the whole world!

[ChumpDumper]

Why do some of you think the President and Rumsfeld should share those plans with the American people?

We don't expect them to share anything with us.

The goal is total victory and the way they'll do it is the plan for victory and whatever the outcome we'll say it's victory because we say what victory is and no one else could possibly conceive what could cons ute victory.

[gtownspur]

We don't expect them to share anything with us.

The goal is total victory and the way they'll do it is the plan for victory and whatever the outcome we'll say it's victory because we say what victory is and no one else could possibly conceive what could cons ute victory.

You were requesting the exit strategy in this thread for the past 3 pages!
You seem to me a dishonest person.

So you know what? i hate calling someone who's mature names, so i'll hear what you'll have to say to clear this confusion up.

Tell me. were you not calling for bush to let you see the exit strategy?