Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Well the "old hound" certainly lead you around by the nose...

re: Well the "old hound" certainly led you around by the nose...
Tom Brosz — (archived)

I opened the thread by pointing out yet another case where mutually inconsistent political comments on Bush policy are undertaken with no apparent concern for the inconsistency.

Bowser responds, stating that the "withdrawal" trial balloon was just a political ploy, and only came from one person, and adds:

Folks are dying over in Iraq because he and Rumsfeld have sent over too few for the mission.

And, he's clearly afraid to send more. Doesn't want this quagmire compared to other quagmires.

So far, so good. A valid response to my initial post, and some additional material.

- My response:

Please explain to the rest of us how an additional 20,000 troops on the ground will result in fewer attacks on our troops, especially given the current "one-hand-behind-the-back" engagement rules. I follow up with a statement on what, other than more troops, will actually help create victory.

- Bowser responds by rattling off, for about the tenth time, the "We're all going to die" litany. Like I didn't hear all that back in April. He again repeats, without addressing my question at all, the fact that we have too few troops.

- In response to the Litany of Despair, I point out that there are a lot of other sources besides the ones he is using, and that not all of them say that we're doomed. I add that a lot of the upsurge in violence right now is politically-motivated, and that this obvious strategy on the part of the insurgency and terrorists is apparently working on a number of Americans, including him. I do not repeat the question about the troops, since I've already asked it once.

- He comes back again with the same Litany, shortened, and repeats the "number of troops" statement, having never addressed my question as to exactly what an additional mass of troops would actually be doing in Iraq to improve the situation, given the current limits on their operations, and the current attack methods of the enemy.

Is this changing the subject on my part? Or is it me talking to a wall again?

If I'm moving too fucking fast for anyone, let me know. If I'm wasting my time here, I got other things I can do.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (66 posts)