Replies

Look, what I'm saying is rather simple. You flamed me when I didn't deserve it, and then I gave you what you dished out in return. You didn't like it. I cited my sources (to the extent that I could). You didn't like that, then you created a non issue, asserting that I was passing on classified material.

That was b.s.. There is a little red tag down below where you post. It says "loose lips sink ships". I firmly believe in following that warning, just to set your mind at ease.

EVERYTHING I have posted is based on publicly available source material. In addition, my source basically confirms that what I am saying is pretty much on the mark. Fallujah is a tough nut, with perhaps 700 guys in there built around a core group of 300 jihadi (go here to Wretchard's latest for a good update of where things stand).

The fact is, you weren't looking at what was publicly available, not only here, but online at Wretchard's Belmont Club, and through other sources. So you accused me of passing classified information when I did no such thing, nor did my source, which is the most important thing to clear up. You were just too damn lazy to look things up when it was easier to condemn Bush or Bremer before the issue has been fully decided.

The next time you accuse someone of passing classified information, you damn well better have proof. You didn't, and you deserved the flaming you got.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

*Look, what I'm saying is rather simple. You flamed me when I didn't deserve it, and then I gave you what you dished out in return. You didn't like it. I cited my sources (to the extent that I could).*

Let's stop right there. First, I'm not going to get into the "he started it! no, he started it!" game--I gave that up around the sixth grade. But it is useful to be accurate: my "flame" was precipitated by an unsolicited post from you that basically told me I didn't know what I was talking about. Second, you are being dishonest. You spoke very specifically of your "sources", right down to saying one worked in "blank," and the other was a "blank" (not going to repeat the info you gave regarding them in the deleted post). I frankly believe that these "sources" of yours exist only in your own imagination, but let's put that aside. The bottom line is that you should (a) not have any military "sources" passing ANY kind of operational info on to you, period, unless you have a Need To Know, and (b) certainly none of us should be reading about it on a website open to the public even if they are. That is the heart of the matter.

*then you created a non issue, asserting that I was passing on classified material*

It's *not* a "non issue," for starters, but I never once stated that you were "passing on classified material." That, to be sure, is a lie. What I *did* do was point out that your "sources" should not be telling you or anyone else without a Need To Know *anything* regarding the immediate tactical situation on the ground. And certainly you shouldn't be bragging about your "sources" on a website for the whole world to read.

*So you accused me of passing classified information*

Another lie (see above).

*You were just too damn lazy to look things up when it was easier to condemn Bush or Bremer before the issue has been fully decided*

No, you were apparently too "lazy" to actually read what I've posted on the matter. I've condemned neither Bush nor Bremer, or even referred to them at all in the matter. Another lie.

*The next time you accuse someone of passing classified information, you damn well better have proof. You didn't, and you deserved the flaming you got*

Don't mind the flame, but I do mind the distortions and outright lied (and you did it again). That's what I mind, and anyone interested at all can go back and read my posts and confirm for themselves whose veracity needs to be questioned in this debate. They can see all of my posts, but they'll miss out on one of yours because it was rightfully yanked.
EOM.