Oleg Bach Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 Curious that you would go straight for the penis metaphor....which (black) latencies are we dealing with here ?Obama is taller than Harper, and he wears much better suits (Hart Shafner Marx) It's just sad.....the real contest is the opposition leader competing with PM Harper for a chance to kiss Obama's ass and become #1 poodle. At least keep your dignity! Ignatieff was like some little groupie hanging out back stage ready to please Obama any way he could to increase his reputation as a statesman whore. Yes that is embarassing - I have no respect for anyone that bows to a fleshly or cravenly carved idol - Your congress acted like a hundred Ignatieffs in the presense of Greenspan - so shut up ---- I thought that when Greenspan left the chambers they were going to fight over who would lick the foot prints of the great magician. Yes - Obamas suits hang like air - I've worn a Hart Shafner Marx on set - You really don't know what good clothing feels like till you wear the best - and Harper is a middle class guy with a second rate tailer --- The Canadians are not into good suits - they are into the old fashioned "power suit" --- that's all padding with a starch coating. Now - no more penis jokes ---Did you notice that I mentioned it last after you thought of it first? Sorry I used the metaphor... Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 ....Your congress acted like a hundred Ignatieffs in the presense of Greenspan - so shut up ---- I thought that when Greenspan left the chambers they were going to fight over who would lick the foot prints of the great magician. Congress has a lower rating than Bush....now you know why. Yes - Obamas suits hang like air - I've worn a Hart Shafner Marx on set - You really don't know what good clothing feels like till you wear the best - Obama is GQ....Harper is "Field & Stream" (those references will only make sense if your CRTC has permitted it.) Now - no more penis jokes ---Did you notice that I mentioned it last after you thought of it first? Sorry I used the metaphor... Penis metaphors are always fun on this forum....especially trying to win CanAm size contests by invoking ratios or per-capita size. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 20, 2009 Report Posted February 20, 2009 That was fun. Jezzz I hope the other members don't think we are forming an on line stand up comedy team...You can be the straight man and I will tell the jokes..wait...deals off - unless I get top billing and you remain the pillow biter....... There - I am the king and you are ----------------------------American...translated it means ....lowly ones with high expectations ...look it up. Quote
gordiecanuk Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 wahoo! Mission Accomplished - wait... what was the mission? What was accomplished? Mission accomplished...Iraq has seen its WPM eliminated, the war was won before it even started. The U.S. just installed a new government to replace the one they had previously propped up. Quote You're welcome to visit my blog: Canadian Soapbox
jdobbin Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 It would allow our troops serving there now more protection, to secure more of the forward areas with a forward operating bases....it would save Canadian lives...But to answer your question, in the grand scheme of things it would only put a small dent in it....as the US are looking for an addtional 10,000 NATO troops.. And this brings me back to the allies question. Canada has put itself in the deadliest area with no special restrictions on military operations as other countries have. If we sent 1000 more soldiers, it doesn't seem to influence our allies all that much to do more themselves. True enough, however we knew what we were signing on to when we first agreed to move south, there was no time table, no promises made... Not exactly true. Twice we have set deadlines for out involvement based on help coming and the Afghans taking over. Twice, our allies have not met those deadlines. We extended the mission anyway but to do it again without meaningful contributions from our allies seems foolish. Canada contribution is large, but no means massive, a country with over 36 million can only afford to send over 2800 pers and contribute 100 mil a year....don't you think we can do better for a G-8 nation....shit check out what Holland gives.... Canada now contributes $250 million a year. That figure is from 2006-07. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...80122/20080122/ Many have said our government has done a crappy job in regards to mission PR... That was Harper's policy. Keep in mind that the US numbers will increase by 35,000...also in the PDF doc, it does not mention the additional 11,000 US pers not involved in NATO mission....so by june of this year thier numbers should be close to over 75,000 troops....plus there is still a need for 10,000 more troops from NATO. It is why Obama is looking at some of the other NATO allies who pale in comparison to what Canada is contributing. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 To win any contest you have to clearly know that there are two opposing teams. One is pitted against the other and the contention begins - and the more powerful wins...game over. It's how we measure and define power - what is more powerful - an ancient hidding in a cave with animal smarts and a spiritual sense of purpose - or a device that searches out warm objects hiding in a hole? There are no real battle lines drawn in this affair - thus no matter what it is not winnable - you would have to genocide every last person considered Taliban - in doing so it becomes like a medeival Pope prouder than hell who sends a message to the holy land to instruct the confused crusaders - who can not tell the difference between Christians and Muslims..so he blurts out in his letter - "Kill all of them and we will be sure" - The only way to win is to detroy the Afghan culture utterly - that is the American plan..to overwhelm with a surge-- but long as one Taliban is left-- it will not be effective - and even if you kill them all the young sons who are not Taliban will become so out of sheer contempt, revenge and anger. Quote
gordiecanuk Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 To win any contest you have to clearly know that there are two opposing teams. One is pitted against the other and the contention begins - and the more powerful wins...game over. It's how we measure and define power - what is more powerful - an ancient hidding in a cave with animal smarts and a spiritual sense of purpose - or a device that searches out warm objects hiding in a hole? There are no real battle lines drawn in this affair - thus no matter what it is not winnable - you would have to genocide every last person considered Taliban - in doing so it becomes like a medeival Pope prouder than hell who sends a message to the holy land to instruct the confused crusaders - who can not tell the difference between Christians and Muslims..so he blurts out in his letter - "Kill all of them and we will be sure" - The only way to win is to detroy the Afghan culture utterly - that is the American plan..to overwhelm with a surge-- but long as one Taliban is left-- it will not be effective - and even if you kill them all the young sons who are not Taliban will become so out of sheer contempt, revenge and anger. General McNeill (not 100% sure of the spelling) the former US general in charge of NATO forces in Afghanistan said there would have to be something like 400K soldiers in Afghan if proper counterinsurgency methods were being used...and even with Obama ratcheting up US troop levels, they're still nowhere close to that. The Soviets had close to that number at the height of their occupation...and were still forced to withdraw. All this for a f***ing natural gas pipeline, and now the US is cutting deals with countries like Uzbekistan, ugh. So much for the humanitarian side of the mission. Quote You're welcome to visit my blog: Canadian Soapbox
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 General McNeill (not 100% sure of the spelling) the former US general in charge of NATO forces in Afghanistan said there would have to be something like 400K soldiers in Afghan if proper counterinsurgency methods were being used... That's what they said about Iraq too....just takes longer. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 That's what they said about Iraq too....just takes longer. And every one looks the other way as Saudi Arabia and that trusted friend of the west Pakistan contiue to supply bodies and equipment and some spending money for the poor fanatics who see it as a not so bad paying job - good luck --- re-inforcements for the other guys does not have to be flown in at great expense - they walk. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 ... re-inforcements for the other guys does not have to be flown in at great expense - they walk. No need to airlift them home either. They go straight to Allah and the 72 virgins. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
punked Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 That's what they said about Iraq too....just takes longer. I think they said it about Vietnam as well right? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 I think they said it about Vietnam as well right? Nope...Vietnam was over 500,000. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
gordiecanuk Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 This thread is going to be here for a long long time...we're going to be stuck in Afghanistan forever, we can just keep changing the definition of victory to justify all of our dead. Quote You're welcome to visit my blog: Canadian Soapbox
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 This thread is going to be here for a long long time...we're going to be stuck in Afghanistan forever, we can just keep changing the definition of victory to justify all of our dead. IIRC, Canada was in Cyprus for over 25 years.....with "dead". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 No need to airlift them home either. They go straight to Allah and the 72 virgins. Stop being so funny --- that's not bad.---- I really can't come up with any vision that will compare to ghostly figures rising up without the aid of man made air craft. As for virgins - A good Catholic boy believes his mother is a virgin ----- and a nasty gang banger will go coo coo if you mention his mamma....and if you really think that there are some cazy zealots out there that believe they are going to die and f*** for eternity - well what happens when they have been laid 72 times - I guess there is no real eternal bliss - but they don't look ahead - I would not say that our dellusions are of a higher quality - When the average American grunt actually believes that he is bringing "democracy' to a poor nation - he is just as delluded as the 72 virgin sect. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 ....When the average American grunt actually believes that he is bringing "democracy' to a poor nation - he is just as delluded as the 72 virgin sect. That's not why the average American grunt does it.....has nothing to do with democracy, apple-pie, or Chevrolet. That's just propaganda for the rubes back home. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 That's not why the average American grunt does it.....has nothing to do with democracy, apple-pie, or Chevrolet. That's just propaganda for the rubes back home. So why does he go? Do you know? I can't figure it out....oh yah -- The commader and chief thing - they actually respect the idea of high faluting authority - whether it be the devil himself - My country right or wrong? You tell me why the average soldier knowingly enlists with the full knowledge that he will be called upon to do things that might be nationally correct but morally wrong ---- well --- what's the scope on that inside info - inside the helmet. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 So why does he go? Do you know? I can't figure it out.... Well, I was never an official grunt (never liked camping)...just trained with some at Quantico. Never deployed to ground combat either. But the psychology applies across military, police, and fire fighting.....at least they think they have figured it out. To make a long story short...they do it for each other at the most basic level...and the bond forged under that kind of heat/pressure is hard to break. That's one reason why some go back for several tours. I defer to Army Guy...who has far more current and relevant experience in such matters. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Well, I was never an official grunt (never liked camping)...just trained with some at Quantico. Never deployed to ground combat either. But the psychology applies across military, police, and fire fighting.....at least they think they have figured it out. To make a long story short...they do it for each other at the most basic level...and the bond forged under that kind of heat/pressure is hard to break. That's one reason why some go back for several tours. I defer to Army Guy...who has far more current and relevant experience in such matters. They need to be part of something and if they can not find honor in civilian society they create loyalty and honor amongst themselves - sounds like a very old need base in true manhood and true friendship - so as long as they are together it does not matter where they are or what for - great....that makes for a useful collective human tool --- that can be abused...The Marshall class are like cops - they will take orders right or wrong - My wife's grand father and father were cops - they were .....................weasils. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 They need to be part of something and if they can not find honor in civilian society they create loyalty and honor amongst themselves - sounds like a very old need base in true manhood and true friendship - so as long as they are together it does not matter where they are or what for - great....that makes for a useful collective human tool --- that can be abused... Sure...it can be manipulated and prostituted....but it can also be distilled to a purity that has always been lacking elsewhere in society, and this is what ultimately leads to disillusioned soldiers. The honor or code is hard to maintain with those who have not or will not make such a commitment. Some call it the romanticism of a long lost warrior class, eroded by the cynical realities of today. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Sure...it can be manipulated and prostituted....but it can also be distilled to a purity that has always been lacking elsewhere in society, and this is what ultimately leads to disillusioned soldiers. The honor or code is hard to maintain with those who have not or will not make such a commitment. Some call it the romanticism of a long lost warrior class, eroded by the cynical realities of today. I was happy to be raised by a Red Army Officer - it's not about being romantic - it is neccessary - the decipleship or (disipline) makes for a better life -you put the garbage in the garbage - and you sort out who is what and what they are not...it's order. It's hurtful when I see soldiers abused or wasted..or dishonored by the commander or the public. That is my primary concern with todays wars - the disrespect they have for military! Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 ..... It's hurtful when I see soldiers abused or wasted..or dishonored by the commander or the public. That is my primary concern with todays wars - the disrespect they have for military! That's not a new phenom.....but faced with such circumstances...the military needs something it can call its own....it's really not just a job. "Ours is not to reason why...ours is but to do or die." Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 That's not a new phenom.....but faced with such circumstances...the military needs something it can call its own....it's really not just a job."Ours is not to reason why...ours is but to do or die." That catch phrase will get you needlessly killed - my dad served in occupied Paris as a double op..He served at the Kremlin - and he hid in Berlin - and he survived. The Clintons are contemptable because as upper white trash trailer parkers they actually think they are better than those that come from the blue collar to the green..These people believe they are superiour but at the same time expect the soldier to shore up their selfish and corrupt enterprise - they are disgraceful. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 That catch phrase will get you needlessly killed - my dad served in occupied Paris as a double op..He served at the Kremlin - and he hid in Berlin - and he survived. The Clintons are contemptable because as upper white trash trailer parkers they actually think they are better than those that come from the blue collar to the green..These people believe they are superiour but at the same time expect the soldier to shore up their selfish and corrupt enterprise - they are disgraceful. Hold on there pardner...you are making the distinction between the reasons to die. Once you are serving, that kind of objectivity takes on a completely different twist, from fratracide to winning the Congressional Medal of Honor or Victoria Cross. There is a healthy fatalism that sets in to keep you from going nuts.....hence the unit bonding and sometimes outright disdain for the rubes who sent them there or worst yet, the rubes who protest them going when told they have a mission to accomplish. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted February 22, 2009 Report Posted February 22, 2009 Hold on there pardner...you are making the distinction between the reasons to die. Once you are serving, that kind of objectivity takes on a completely different twist, from fratracide to winning the Congressional Medal of Honor or Victoria Cross. There is a healthy fatalism that sets in to keep you from going nuts.....hence the unit bonding and sometimes outright disdain for the rubes who sent them there or worst yet, the rubes who protest them going when told they have a mission to accomplish. I guess it was my fathers influence - It took a long time for the revolutionaries to reach my grand fathers house - six years after that - they set him up and convicted him and shot him in the head...My father stood by Stalin as an honour guard...he knew that this man had killed his father - He could never take these "leaders" seriously. Was he committed to a cause?...well he was in charge of some of the propaganda - he filled the empty heads of young recruits with garbage.... What I remember is that he was damaged - and that damage was a result of killing - and wading though death...mum was the same - she crawled though mounds of corpses to find food......most westerners did not have parents who witnessed the collapse of civilzation..it effected me...to see him cry. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.