LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 128
0 members and 128 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 10-11-2005, 03:07 PM   #2832
Gattigap
Southern charmer
 
Gattigap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: At the Great Altar of Passive Entertainment
Posts: 7,033
The are endowed by their creator with certain inalieable rights......

Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
And Soros, and the NYT, and Rather, and PBS, and Michael Moore, and The Ghost of Wellstone, and . . . . Hey, it was a close election. These things count.
Interesting how imposing those forces look in the rear mirror.

I'm incredulous that you believe that the Forces of Liberal Evil would've said in 2002 that "well, 120,000 is one thing, but 200k? 300k? Omigod!"

For those on the Left that hated going, they hated going regardless what of what the number was. It was a boatload of people. That you think the Bushies flinched -- because of the Democrats -- by sending 1 boatload instead of the 2 or 3 that we really needed simply makes no sense.

Quote:
And yet we're paying for bridges and roads and medicare drugs and NCLB and free immigration and the resultant bennies and . . . tons of unneeded shyte on bush's watch. There's more than enough to thrash out to pay the marginal costs of more troops.
I was thinking more about the sacrifice of blood than the treasure, but I agree with your that Today's GOP has become quite proficient at spending.

Quote:
Actually, we do. As shown during the Katrina hysteria, we've only called up about - what? - 15%-20% of the available reserves? We've only deployed a minority of the actives? There's plenty more out there, plus you seemingly discount the ability to boost pay and bennies and draw more in. Plus, a draft.
Yeah, the draft would've gone over quite well with the American public. See Alt. #2.

Quote:
Remember one of Rummy's motivations for this? A larger force is politically unpopular, and so he wanted to be able to do more - to get more and better results - with fewer opportunities for political dissent and hysteria, which translates into fewer troops and costs.
So you're saying that we're dictating our military policy by Rummy's desire to avoid political problems? That's rich.

Quote:
I'll stick with, primarily #1.
And, if it happens that things DON'T turn out well, the Dems and the MSM are lined up to take the blame for torpedoing what was otherwise really a nifty policy and execution by the Bushies. Bonus!
__________________
I'm done with nonsense here. --- H. Chinaski
Gattigap is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:47 PM.