ISIS Takes Control of Mosul

#251
#251
Grand Vol said:
You are so ignorant of the political situation in the Middle East it's almost disheartening. You have zero clue about what went on, what goes on and what is happening right now in Iraq or any other area. So I really wish you would just be quiet and not comment any more. Other than "well, we shouldn't have invaded!" comments you have offered nothing of substance to this discussion whatsoever and you don't even know the history of what you are talking about.

Your ignorance is bliss as I stated before and is truly amazing that you won't even take the time to attempt to educate yourself on everything that went on prior to the invasion all the way back to 1990 and the events leading to the invasion. But you would rather the US military wear itself out enforcing "No Fly Zones" and continually rotate troops into the Gulf rather than just get it over with. Again, I think the conduct after the war certainly could have been conducted differently. But again, your ignorance of everything that transpired prior to is just simply astounding. Perhaps it's not ignorance, but omission of facts that are inconvenient to your stance of sitting around banging your bongo drum while singing John Lennon's Give Peace a Chance.

So you'll say "well, none of this would have happened had we not invaded." Not even realizing the roots of ISIS were in place before we invaded and actually started in Syria. And furthermore, was dismantled as a fighting force during the surge operations in 2007. Yet seven years later, it's because we invaded they are lopping off heads of Iraqi policemen and military members. Yeah, that makes sense.

Please do yourself a favor and just stop commenting on things you are truly ignorant of.
Click to expand...

Seriously?

Feel free to ignore me or whatever. You presume quiet a bit though without knowing anything about my past or what I currently do. The only issue I had prior was your ridiculous conclusion that because we weren't privy to some secret information you were touting we couldn't understand the situation. Which is beyond ridiculous.

And the surge comments were a joke Francis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#253
#253
alexmanu said:
I am in the Army reserves (Territorial army) and more than happy to serve my country if they come calling. Don't assume things about me.
Click to expand...

And, I'm registered for selective service. Feel free to join the regulars for the wars you want fought.
 
#254
#254
therealUT said:
And, I'm registered for selective service. Feel free to join the regulars for the wars you want fought.
Click to expand...

Even If I join 2 PARA (the regular battalion in my town) they would have nothing to do with aerial attacks, that's the job of the RAF. I can confidently say I will never fly a plane in the RAF due to being color blind so that's that.

Difference between you and me is that the reserve forces in the UK are going to be relied on after 2016 due to the cuts to regular infantry so If a large scale conflict involving British ground troops were to occur I would certainly be called for service of some sort, probably within the conflict zone.

So again you have a complete non-point. In any case the regular military personnel sign up for duty and I fail to see the argument that if you think they should intervene you should be the one fighting. I think even reg. military personnel would disagree with that P.O.V. they sign up to protect and serve and don't expect those who sent them, to fight alongside them.
 
Last edited:
#255
#255
therealUT said:
And, I'm registered for selective service. Feel free to join the regulars for the wars you want fought.
Click to expand...

Slightly OT, but I know you said you were AD with the 10th if I recall. Did you spend time in the IZ or Stan?
 
#256
#256
alexmanu said:
Even If I join 2 PARA (the regular battalion in my town) they would have nothing to do with aerial attacks, that's the job of the RAF. I can confidently say I will never fly a plane in the RAF due to being color blind so that's that.

Difference between you and me is that the reserve forces in the UK are going to be relied on after 2016 due to the cuts to regular infantry so If a large scale conflict involving British ground troops were to occur I would certainly be called for service of some sort, probably within the conflict zone.
Click to expand...

No, the difference between you and me is I made a point to join up with the most likely forces to see action in any conflicts I supported. You have signed up for benefits with little to no actual combat commitments yet support aggressive policies that will very likely lead to combat commitments from your country, yet combat you will not take part in.

As for color-blindness, I know plenty of pilots who are color-blind, yet memorized the dot charts and passed the tests. Basically, where there is a will, there is a way. Maybe, just maybe, you lack the will. Lucky for you, others don't and will do your dirty work for you.
 
#258
#258
therealUT said:
No, the difference between you and me is I made a point to join up with the most likely forces to see action in any conflicts I supported. You have signed up for benefits with little to no actual combat commitments yet support aggressive policies that will very likely lead to combat commitments from your country, yet combat you will not take part in.

As for color-blindness, I know plenty of pilots who are color-blind, yet memorized the dot charts and passed the tests. Basically, where there is a will, there is a way. Maybe, just maybe, you lack the will. Lucky for you, others don't and will do your dirty work for you.
Click to expand...


Again totally irrelevant. Reg. troops don't expect the politicians (who vote to send them) to fight, they sign up in the military expecting to see combat. You have a non-point.

You seem to just want to participate in a 'mine is bigger than yours' type contest when your point has no validity and most AD troops would disagree with your opinion.

As for the color blindness point, clearly the American air force have different policies to the RAF because you can't be an active pilot in the RAF with color-blindness.
 
Last edited:
#260
#260
alexmanu said:
Again totally irrelevant. Reg. troops don't expect the politicians who vote to send them to fight, they sign up in the military expecting to see combat. You have a non-point.
Click to expand...

Actually, I do expect the politicians to fight, or at least offer their sons and daughters to fight if they are too old and out of shape.

alexmanu said:
You seem to just want to participate in a 'mine is bigger than yours' type contest when your point has no validity and most AD troops would disagree with your opinion.
Click to expand...

No, I want jingoistic war-hawk idiots who have little to no chance of ever fighting the wars they support to actually put themselves in a position in which it is highly likely that they will fight in the wars they support.

As for what active-duty troops think, I'm going to go ahead and say that as someone with no active-duty experience to speak of you have no ****ing clue what active-duty troops actually think. I'll give you a hint though, active-duty troops, particularly infantry grunts, cannot ****ing stand reservists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#261
#261
Grand Vol said:
Could have sworn you said you were with the 10th Mountain.

Neither place was friendly. Kind of like Newark after dark.
Click to expand...

Nope. I would have loved to have been in 10th Mountain and froze my ass off in upstate New York, but, unfortunately, I froze my ass off in central Kansas.

Bayji was corrupt as all hell, but, due to that corruption, a hell of a lot friendlier than Sadr City and East Baghdad.
 
#262
#262
therealUT said:
Actually, I do expect the politicians to fight, or at least offer their sons and daughters to fight if they are too old and out of shape.




As for what active-duty troops think, I'm going to go ahead and say that as someone with no active-duty experience to speak of you have no ****ing clue what active-duty troops actually think. I'll give you a hint though, active-duty troops, particularly infantry grunts, cannot ****ing stand reservists.
Click to expand...

Well I didn't know the yanks were so angry. I train along regular paratroopers on most weekends and they are nothing but respectful. But then again you lot aren't known for your manners. Your use of profanity is a bit childish and needless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#263
#263
alexmanu said:
Again totally irrelevant. Reg. troops don't expect the politicians (who vote to send them) to fight, they sign up in the military expecting to see combat. You have a non-point.

You seem to just want to participate in a 'mine is bigger than yours' type contest when your point has no validity and most AD troops would disagree with your opinion.

As for the color blindness point, clearly the American air force have different policies to the RAF because you can't be an active pilot in the RAF with color-blindness.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, positively, 110% WRONG.
 
#265
#265
therealUT said:
Nope. I would have loved to have been in 10th Mountain and froze my ass off in upstate New York, but, unfortunately, I froze my ass off in central Kansas.

Bayji was corrupt as all hell, but, due to that corruption, a hell of a lot friendlier than Sadr City and East Baghdad.
Click to expand...

Trust me, no you wouldn't have
 
#266
#266
therealUT said:
Nope. I would have loved to have been in 10th Mountain and froze my ass off in upstate New York, but, unfortunately, I froze my ass off in central Kansas.
Click to expand...

Hey, you stayed there afterwards lol

therealUT said:
Bayji was corrupt as all hell, but, due to that corruption, a hell of a lot friendlier than Sadr City and East Baghdad.
Click to expand...

So you're saying Bayji = Chicago?
 
#267
#267
In any case I think this thread has been slightly derailed. The real question is will Western forces intervene in some way in the conflict? I see Iran wants to make sure ISIS don't take over to consolidate the Shia government that they have been working on for the past few years. Quite honestly an Iranian-controlled, Shia-majority Iraqi government is preferable to ISIS or any other type of Jihadist movement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#268
#268
And another OT item, looks like bad stuff heading your way TRUT, keep your head down.
 
#269
#269
I think we need to ****can the whole concept or excuse of spreading democracy. We also need to understand that what worked in central and Western Europe in the mid 20th century will not work in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Africa. I'll come out and say it, truth is truth, those regions aren't as culturally advanced as European culture. While democracy and republicanism have roots going back over 2000 years in Europe, despotism of one form or another has been the rule of thumb in the Middle East and Central Asia going back to the Babylonian empire, or Assyrian and Hittite if you want to go further back. Trying to force Western ideals onto cultures that are unwilling to accept them will never work. Those changes have to come from within, and from gradual Western influence. Throw in the fact that significant portions of the populace in these regions detest Western culture due to religious idealism.

The US made the mistake in 91 of turning a regional ally (although if dubious nature) and counterbalance to religious extremism and Iran into an enemy over a small little country called Kuwait. Whether it was for the best on intentions or close ties of Bush to the Saudis, it should have never been done. Now we've lost a lot of capital, lost a lot of lives, for what? A situation that will be much worse than what we would have had if we left it alone. Saddam Hussein was most certainly not a good man, but at some point in international politics you'll have to work with not so nice people because the alternative to a despot who works with the West is much worse.
 
#272
#272
therealUT said:
Perfect evening for some bourbon and some smokes on the porch.
Click to expand...

Ya'll MidWesterners and your damn storms!

Anyhow, hope all is well if this is what you two are referring to.

This reminds me though. Grand Vol, if you read this, I know you're originally from Tennessee, but do Oklahomans think of themselves as Southerners or as something else? I think the culture is very similar, but sometimes people think of themselves as different. I know this is random as hell, but thoughts? Just something I've always wondered about.
 
#273
#273
volprof said:
I don't doubt it. Honestly, although Bush's presidency was basically as disastrous as the current president's, I think he was a fairly well-intentioned man. I think; could be wrong. Just not very intelligent.

Now, Dick Cheney: one of the most evil men to ever have influence in the Oval Office. Something that has always frightened and baffled me is a highly intelligent man who is yet still evil. One would think the two characteristics were mutually exclusive but, as history demonstrates, they are not unfortunately.
Click to expand...

The fact that you would string these words together shows just how out of touch with reality modern academics actually are.
 
#274
#274
alexmanu said:
Again totally irrelevant. Reg. troops don't expect the politicians (who vote to send them) to fight, they sign up in the military expecting to see combat. You have a non-point.

You seem to just want to participate in a 'mine is bigger than yours' type contest when your point has no validity and most AD troops would disagree with your opinion.

As for the color blindness point, clearly the American air force have different policies to the RAF because you can't be an active pilot in the RAF with color-blindness.
Click to expand...

The color blindness charts can be memorized. I can see colors just fine. I can't pass a colorblindness test.

However, you are correct in one thing. There are different standards. Not all RAF pilots could fly in the USAF. This isn't a who's is bigger deal, it's just how it is.
 
#275
#275
82_VOL_83 said:
The color blindness charts can be memorized. I can see colors just fine. I can't pass a colorblindness test.

However, you are correct in one thing. There are different standards. Not all RAF pilots could fly in the USAF. This isn't a who's is bigger deal, it's just how it is.
Click to expand...

Well USAF fly different planes, equipment differs etc. etc. Don't think all USAF pilots could fly in the Red Arrows it's a non-point. Both countries have pretty much equal quality of pilot, entry requirements obviously differ regarding color-blindness.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top