Skip to comments.
Getting the Lowdown on Iraq-(Lower ranking combat Officers answer senators)
time ^
| Sunday, Nov. 20, 2005
| SALLY B. DONNELLY
Posted on 11/20/2005 4:11:00 PM PST by Flavius
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-138 next last
To: YOUGOTIT
21
posted on
11/20/2005 4:28:00 PM PST
by
Alia
To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Well I guess it's part of it - in bold below:
"the Doctrine expresses that military action should be used only as a last resort and only if there is a clear risk to national security by the intended target; the force, when used, should be overwhelming and disproportionate to the force used by the enemy; there must be strong support for the campaign by the general public; and there must be a clear exit strategy from the conflict in which the military is engaged."
22
posted on
11/20/2005 4:28:18 PM PST
by
Paladin2
(If the political indictment's from Fitz, the jury always acquits.)
To: yut
You say you are in Iraq; and you say you are not a soldier. What are you doing in Iraq, Yut? How do you come by this "data" you proffer?
23
posted on
11/20/2005 4:29:28 PM PST
by
Alia
To: Flavius
I get emails from a coworker in Iraq who is there with the Minnesota National Guard. He says the same thing - they need more troops.
The problem as he sees it is that the cultural change the Iraqi people are going through. Moving from the rule of the thug to the rule of law is difficult to accomplish in a short time.
To: yut
Do you? You all sound more intrested in propping up some political party Sounds like you are propping up the party that wants to lose and see America humiliated ala Vietnam, the democrats.
25
posted on
11/20/2005 4:29:49 PM PST
by
Dane
( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
Comment #26 Removed by Moderator
Comment #27 Removed by Moderator
To: Republican Wildcat
Are they going to say the troops are the problem or not having enough troops are the problem?Jack Murtha says not enough troops are the problem.
Knee-jerk republicans have attempted to smear him by saying that he's blaming the troops.
It's a very despicable tactic to avoid criticism.
To: Paladin2
Thanks for the info. Usually about three attackers to every defender seems to be the rule of thumb.
29
posted on
11/20/2005 4:35:35 PM PST
by
AEMILIUS PAULUS
(It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
To: Alia
You say you are in Iraq; and you say you are not a soldier. What are you doing in Iraq, Yut? How do you come by this "data" you proffer? Do you really think that the military is the only presence in Iraq?
Donchya think that maybe some of those evil, mercenary contractors might have an insight or two?
30
posted on
11/20/2005 4:37:38 PM PST
by
Eagle Eye
(There ought to be a law against excess legislation.)
To: Eagle Eye
I already asked him. He's none of the "above". I see he just got banned or suspended. Maybe he'll come back under another name with more "news" from the "front".
31
posted on
11/20/2005 4:39:24 PM PST
by
Alia
To: digger48
Jr O's CANT know the "big picture" I'm surprised they dont consult with saddam.
32
posted on
11/20/2005 4:39:31 PM PST
by
aumrl
(shah was not a threat 2 us...........)
To: Dane
Sounds like you are propping up the party that wants to lose and see America humiliated ala Vietnam, the democrats.Care to share your logic in deducing that yut (now suspended or bannded) wants to prop up the democrats?
Sounds to me that he's right on target--to get a non political answer, ask the troops who are in the field.
33
posted on
11/20/2005 4:40:48 PM PST
by
Eagle Eye
(There ought to be a law against excess legislation.)
To: Willie Green
Incorrect. The Democrats, including Murtha, have said the presence of the troops are the problem.
Get your facts straight and quit cozying up to the ultra-left of this nation.
To: Eagle Eye
And before ya jump: I've got loved ones in Iraq AND as contractors; so, yeah... I was civil when I asked. The "tude" just kept ad homineming and going bananas at me; on another thread. He clipped from this thread, and tossed it at me in another thread, while continuining to post ad hominems directed at me. You know any contractors talking like that?
35
posted on
11/20/2005 4:42:53 PM PST
by
Alia
To: Republican Wildcat
This could put the libs in a bind. Are they going to say the troops are the problem or not having enough troops are the problem?
I don't think they really care anymore about making sense.
36
posted on
11/20/2005 4:44:13 PM PST
by
coffee260
(coffee(I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!))
To: Eagle Eye
Care to share your logic in deducing that yut (now suspended or bannded) wants to prop up the democrats? Sounds to me that he's right on target--to get a non political answer, ask the troops who are in the field
Uh by pushing a Time article as the god's honest truth, and guess who is doing the questioning? Those oh so non political people, levin, dayton, and RINO warner.
37
posted on
11/20/2005 4:44:21 PM PST
by
Dane
( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
To: Willie Green
Jack Murtha says not enough troops are the problem. Wrongo, willie, murtha said the troops are now the enemy.
38
posted on
11/20/2005 4:45:59 PM PST
by
Dane
( anyone who believes hillary would do something to stop illegal immigration is believing gibberish)
To: Eagle Eye
I know 'em. Two of my pals just got back in town this past week. And from different parts of Iraq. I'm glad they are home. Yut's got an opinion. And so do other soldiers, and they aren't at all like Yut. Don't even talk like Yut ESPECIALLY ON A PUBLIC POSTING BOARD. If they are going to talk "shop"; they do so in venues and with others who understand the "linguistic set".
Most soldiers online and coming back, have NEVER talked like Yut is posting. Not from Iraq (various parts), not from Afghanistan.
Are you a posting-pal of Yuts?
39
posted on
11/20/2005 4:47:09 PM PST
by
Alia
To: Eagle Eye
I've an idea. Why don't the three get their arses in gear and go spend a couple of weeks in Iraq in the field! Yes, I know, Both Levin and Warner are too old for that. But aren't they really to old for the Senate?
40
posted on
11/20/2005 4:47:31 PM PST
by
gaspar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-138 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson