Palin Ft Bragg Visit Opened To Media, With Restrictions - Page 5

dabateman · #41 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

WRONG!

The marines were formed specifically to fight MUSLIM PIRATES off the coast (no nation). Speaking of MARINES.

Where do you suppose they got the nickname "leathernecks"?

Answer deliberately delayed.

We never brought those home now did we? We left them dead on the field. This is the first time we're fighting a non-nation and bringing people back.

Adept1 · #42 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

WRONG!

The marines were formed specifically to fight MUSLIM PIRATES off the coast (no nation). Speaking of MARINES.

Where do you suppose they got the nickname "leathernecks"?

Answer deliberately delayed.

Those marines that went to fight the Muslim Pirates wore leather around their throats so that the pirates would not be able to BEHEAD them. This WAR is nowhere near the first, we used to actually FIGHT our wars.

I steal a good quote

Quote:

We have made massive mistakes in this on this planet because we have untethered ourselves from our founding fathers. Our founding fathers saw us more as Switzerland. We are an enemy to none and friend to all... unless you mess with us. Why are the Leathernecks called the Leathernecks? Because Thomas Jefferson created the Marines and he wanted to do the job that nobody else would do. Not because they were affecting the rest of the world but because the pirates, the Muslim pirates were taking over the seas, and no one had the courage to stand. So we sent them over, with leather on their necks so they couldn't be beheaded in battle. That's why they're called Leathernecks. And we went over and we solved the pirate problem, with the Marines. Then we brought them home.

and if you really want a "lesson" try this

Quote:

I've had enough, and I have a nephew who has been on the front lines. He has spent the last few years in Iraq. He called me a couple of months ago: Uncle _____, it's time for me to reup; what do you think. My advice? Absolutely not. I cannot give you my word as a citizen that this congress will not use you as a pawn. I cannot give you my word as a citizen that this president won't use you for some political device. I cannot give my word that this administration and this congress won't leave you laying out there blowing in the wind with people, with guns and bombs and everything else, coming after you. I can't guarantee that this government won't in the end paint you as a baby killer. Enough. Enough.

George W. Bush made enough mistakes for me. As you know, I was for going into Iraq, but he should have cut Donald Rumsfeld long before he did. There were mistakes with the smaller footprint idea. I'm sorry. Overwhelming force. Shock and awe. The idea of war is you go in with everything you got and you scare the living daylights out of people. And then you leave. We're not nation building. We are you telling me that this, the United States military, couldn't if they would have been unleashed, couldn't go and kill all the bad guys in Afghanistan? We couldn't have gotten Osama Bin Laden? Are you telling me that in one year this government couldn't have gone in and flattened the Taliban, killed? Not taking them and holding them for trial in New York City. Killed the bad guys! You must, if you want to win a war with these people, you go in and you scare the living daylights out of them. And then you leave. And you leave everybody in the region with this idea: You mess with the United States of America and the wrath of God is coming down on you; don't ever mess with us. And by the way, we're not going to rebuild you, either. You mess with us; you're done. And then we go home. But no, no, no. The progressives decided to tie us all together economically so there couldn't be any real war anymore. Well, we're seeing the fruits of that now, aren't we? Long, drawn out wars, exactly what the progressives talked about with Carroll Quigley, exactly what they planned. They announced it in the 1960s and that's the kind of war we have gotten ever since. Where there is no real victor and it just goes on and on and on. And then they tied us together so there couldn't be any real war. If we tie everybody economically together, then there won't be any war. Well, look at the fruits of tying everybody together economically. This progressive nightmare is just that. It is a nightmare that is about to become a nightmare of biblical proportions. It doesn't work.

We have made massive mistakes in this on this planet because we have untethered ourselves from our founding fathers. Our founding fathers saw us more as Switzerland. We are an enemy to none and friend to all... unless you mess with us. Why are the Leathernecks called the Leathernecks? Because Thomas Jefferson created the Marines and he wanted to do the job that nobody else would do. Not because they were affecting the rest of the world but because the pirates, the Muslim pirates were taking over the seas, and no one had the courage to stand. So we sent them over, with leather on their necks so they couldn't be beheaded in battle. That's why they're called Leathernecks. And we went over and we solved the pirate problem, with the Marines. Then we brought them home.

Our problems have been because the Republicans, under the people like George Bush, under the people like Theodore Roosevelt and John McCain, they have thought, we have democracy, we have the greatest system on the planet, we're going to spread this all over the world. It's our duty to do it. It is not. Not the way we've been doing it. And then the progressives on the left have decided, no, no, no, the best way to do it is not through military force. No, not through going out and nation building. What we'll do is we'll do it first through the League of Nations, disaster then we'll do it through the United Nations disaster. Neither of them work. Our founders knew the answer. The best way, the best way to convert people to freedom and liberty and our Constitution, our way of life is to just mind your own business. Do the right thing. Lead by example. If we would just lead by example, people would beat a path to our door. They already did. They wanted to be like us, until we started telling the rest of the world they should be like us.

I have changed a lot in the last ten years. I've changed even more in the last twenty. But I am extraordinarily clear on a couple of things. Our founders had the right ideas. They were perverted around the turn of last century. They were co opted, those ideas, those perverted ideas co opted by both parties. Those perverted ideas are called progressivism. And whether it is spreading power through the United Nations led by the United States, or that's their theory, or spreading our power through our military might and through nation building. Both of them are wrong and they're perverted.

I have also learned that the United States of America is not invincible. It is sinkable. Debt does matter. I have also learned that character does matter. That it does matter what somebody is like in their personal life. If you can't trust them in their own family and in their own business dealings and with the IRS form every year, you can't trust them. I also know it is immoral to ask someone to fight in your name. It is immoral to start a war and not kill as quickly as you possibly can, to end the suffering as quickly as you can. The harder you fight, the more stunning your justice is coming out of the sky. The swifter and the more stunning it is, the faster it is. Anything but a fast victory is immoral. End the suffering. It is immoral to ask someone to fight and die and then not give them everything they're asking for. It is immoral to ask somebody. You go get them. You go do whatever you have to do to stop another 9/11. And then take those CIA agents who did exactly what you asked them to do and then stick them out for political reasons because you're looking for cover. You're a weasel. To ask people to go pick up a gun and fight and then say, "We're not really sure why we're fighting anymore. We're not even really sure if this was worth it." You asked people to kill someone else. That is something that it doesn't go away. That is something that is with you for the rest of your life. And it is only something you can live with if it was worth it! But now we're not really even sure if it was worth it. Then you end the madness. You stop the killing. Today, as every day, I give thanks for the troops. I give thanks to the police officers, the firemen. I give thanks to almighty God that there are people like Marcus Luttrell and his brother that will go into battle in my name and they will do things that I cannot imagine myself doing and they will do it so there is liberty preserved for my children. I get to my knees every day and I thank God for those people. Well, it is time that those of us who are on our knees every day stand up and say enough is enough. You either stand by these people, you either give them what they want, you either stop trying them for things you ask them to do. You either start calling people who shoot our troops by name, "Terrorists, I don't give a flying crap what we did in the past to make them wet themselves since they were 7." They killed our troops. You call them by name. They're terrorists, period. You either start doing that or I just can't support you in any way, shape or form. In any way, shape or form. You have to make your own decision if you were thinking about re enlisting, but I have to tell you we need you so desperately, we are counting on you so desperately. If we lose this in Iraq, if we lose this in Afghanistan, it's all going to start all over again. And it will be left up to our children and our grandchildren if our grandchildren are allowed to have a country anymore. But I cannot ask you to go serve in my name for my country. I promised myself I would not be a part of a generation that created another Vietnam veteran. I will not put my name on that kind of policy, period.

POWERFUL HUH?

Read it again because you missed several points the first time.

dabateman · #43 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

Those marines that went to fight the Muslim Pirates wore leather around their throats so that the pirates would not be able to BEHEAD them. This WAR is nowhere near the first, we used to actually FIGHT our wars.

I steal a good quote

and if you really want a "lesson" try this

POWERFUL HUH?

Read it again because you missed several points the first time.

Our policy on fighting wars is quite a different story from how we choose to handle terrorists. It's not like fighting normal nation to nation fighting. Your arguments about iraq and such are not applicable. You try to conflate history with what's occurring now, and the position that we were put in by the Bush Administration by simply detaining them has caused this issue. We have to deal with them somehow. Had Bush given the orders to take care of things on the field, we wouldn't have any one in Guantanamo to move now would we?

Adept1 · #44 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dabateman

We never brought those home now did we? We left them dead on the field. This is the first time we're fighting a non-nation and bringing people back.

We did NOT bring them back. We BUILT a "SPECIAL" facility to house them and to conduct their trials at. Out of compassion we removed them from the battle and did not KILL them as we had every right to do. ANYTHING ELSE we chose to do with them is perfectly ACCEPTABLE. DUH

If it is acceptable to KILL them because they wish to kill us or our families and country then it is acceptable to do ANYTHING else we choose to do. Out of our own good character and compassion we simply removed them and let them live. Have ANY of the soldiers that they captured got "humane" treatment? Not to mention what they do to civilians.

Adept1 · #45 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dabateman

Our policy on fighting wars is quite a different story from how we choose to handle terrorists. It's not like fighting normal nation to nation fighting. Your arguments about iraq and such are not applicable. You try to conflate history with what's occurring now, and the position that we were put in by the Bush Administration by simply detaining them has caused this issue. We have to deal with them somehow. Had Bush given the orders to take care of things on the field, we wouldn't have any one in Guantanamo to move now would we?

I believe that YOU have the conflation problem.

Are you really saying "no prisoners?

And don't dare interrogate them.

dabateman · #46 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

We did NOT bring them back. Out of compassion we removed them from the battle and did not KILL them as we had every right to do. ANYTHING ELSE we chose to do with them is perfectly ACCEPTABLE. DUH

If it is acceptable to KILL them because they wish to kill us or our families and country then it is acceptable to do ANYTHING else we choose to do. Out of our own good character and compassion we simply removed them and let them live. Have ANY of the soldiers that they captured got "humane" treatment? Not to mention what they do to civilians.

This is where you are wrong. Because we brought the back (removed them from the battlefield in your dodgy language), we are now legally responsible for them and the UN charter of human rights applies.

Had we killed them on the field it would have been self defense and the loss of an enemy combatant. The situation was complicated by us taking possession of them. There are now human rights concerns. And while you are perfectly fine with us doing to them "ANYTHING' we my want, some of us tend to believe that doing anything we want to them will only cause more terrorist fervor as will detaining them indefinitely.

You are proposing eye for eye treatment, but even the youngest child knows that it would leave everyone blind.

Again, you can't blame President Obama for trying to get us out of an ethical, moral, and legal field of landmines. He was stuck with the detainees. NOTICE, we fought a war under Clinton and the first Bush and didn't bring back any "detainees".

dabateman · #47 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

I believe that YOU have the conflation problem.

Are you really saying "no prisoners?

And don't dare interrogate them.

I'm saying don't take possession of them and bring them back to a permanent US facility and keep them for 6+ years. Field evaluations are generally the most effective and efficient. The reason we win wars is because the American public is out of the loop. The only way to keep it that way is to keep it off American soil.

Adept1 · #48 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:44 AM

Let's go all around the world and find everybody that hates us and is planning on "hurting" us and we'll just arrest them and bring them to New York and spend millions of dollars giving them a platform to air their grievances.

dabateman · #49 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

Let's go all around the world and find everybody that hates us and is planning on "hurting" us and we'll just arrest them and bring them to New York and spend millions of dollars giving them a platform to air their grievances.

Lets not. Lets not bring them back to any US facility. We are seeing that there are consequences for trying to run a gulag. There are lots of lessons we didn't learn from the Russians...

Adept1 · #50 (**permalink**) 11-26-2009, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dabateman

This is where you are wrong. Because we brought the back (removed them from the battlefield in your dodgy language), we are now legally responsible for them and the UN charter of human rights applies.

Had we killed them on the field it would have been self defense and the loss of an enemy combatant. The situation was complicated by us taking possession of them. There are now human rights concerns. And while you are perfectly fine with us doing to them "ANYTHING' we my want, some of us tend to believe that doing anything we want to them will only cause more terrorist fervor as will detaining them indefinitely.

You are proposing eye for eye treatment, but even the youngest child knows that it would leave everyone blind.

Again, you can't blame President Obama for trying to get us out of an ethical, moral, and legal field of landmines. He was stuck with the detainees. NOTICE, we fought a war under Clinton and the first Bush and didn't bring back any "detainees".

Obama is the one "BRINGING them back".
We had them detained and were holding them in even BETTER conditions than required. We were doing our "responsibility".
They MUST be detained until they are no longer a THREAT........yes, an INDEFINITE period for many. Until they die of natural causes for others.
More terrorist fervor........BS. Having a PUBLIC TRIAL and allowing them a HUGE platform from which to speak and to martyr themselves IS the terrorist recruitment tool they WANT.
Eye for eye....blind.....foolish gibberish that I did not propose nor condone.

Silly you, if all you do is drop bombs from high altitudes and kill innocents and destroy civilian targets (Clinton's war) you never get ANY prisoners because they cannot jump that high.
Bush first war. There was a surrender and a prisoner agreement....duh. It was because the agreement was NOT KEPT because BILLY was too weak that we had to go back again.

Try again you had no logic.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode