These are the ones that Support our Troops

Published on January 29, 2006 By Dr Guy In Politics

We here it every day. "we support the troops, not the war.". And I think some of them are sincere. And we try to believe that the Mainstream Media is of a like mind. We try, but then for those of us how think that, we are just fooled again. Fooled by the MSM we try to excuse at every opportunity.

I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on

The rest is just standard ignorant diatribe. It is linked so read it at your will.

In one respect, he is much better than his masters. He is honest. Small consolation tho for caring people.

Comments (Page 3)

Dr Guy

on Jan 31, 2006

Yes, conservatives had a picnic over "I did vote for it and then against it," oblivious to the "nuance" that "for" meant repealing the tax cuts in order to support the war appropriation.

When Bush mangles a sentence, we all have fun at his expense. Clearly, Kerry mangled his sentence as well, but in this case, we are supposed to understand what his intent was. Why the double standard?

Dr Guy

on Jan 31, 2006

No, it just means people are tired of hearing the SOS from you.

Even Snowball and Napolean got tired of the bleating sheep.

Dr Guy

on Jan 31, 2006

After leadership sets a time line, you're failing to consider the unknown variables that are incident driven, that affect other down stream time lines which might require leadership to dynamically respond in a completely different direction temporarily.

That is why status reports were created.

garsgolfer

on Jan 31, 2006

That is why status reports were created.

Not sure of your knowledge of in country combat scenarios so I'll offer these thoughts.

SOG runs by the most demanding time and Intel lines and they often change during an operation due to unknown variables. To add confusion, many in country teams are co-lead by CIA ground operatives taking Intel and leadership direction from not only a different chain of command but different and dynamic Intel sources, all relying on communications.

Invision scenario changes to multiple SOG ground teams spread across Iraq and to some extent their Intel is relied upon by general troop operations. Each team requires a dynamic situation response, some in communication with local ground command, while others using the most high tech equipment have spotty even poor communication for days, not including foot travel time line adjustments

Those same ground units might have new Intel that indicates a time line change for them, equally affecting larger command general troop activities in days ahead. Which means local command waits until incursions are complete and a compilation of reports can be made then delivered to in country command so they can adjust time lines accordingly. What was planned as a one month operation, ends up being a 3 months, and that's only one scenario. Imagine multiple scenarios, culture variables and include rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure, since combat results can affect those time lines as well. In the end, what was hoped to be a one to three year time line, becomes a 5-7 years.

Commercial status reports verses in country war status reports traveling to the Pentagon from different time zones have greatly different values.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!