No Sniper. What I'm saying, is what I said. What I mean, is again, what was said. I stated specifics. Unlike you, I do not expect people to believe that my opinions are fact. It's really that simple.

Geist, did we consider Iraq to be a credible threat to the United States? Simple question. Or were Iran, NK, and Syria higher on the list? Yet we invaded Iraq to keep them from using "their WMDs". Now that chemical wepaons were found, people all jump up and down and say, "HEY THOSE ARE WMD'S TOO YOU KNOW!" That's bull$hi* and you know it. We didn't invade them on the pretense that we were looking for their chemical weapon FROGS.

The invasion plan was EFFECTIVE? OMG how so? How does it make sense to crumble an existing government, expect three warring groups to work together to rebuild, as we bug out? Again, complete bull$hi*. Jesus man. Part of an invasion plan includes an exit strategy.

As for the clearance and the NTK, mine is on the same level as most in the military with regards to what was being discussed.

ROT, Iraq was considered to be a credible threat to US interests as well as the only one to which we had legal causus belli. I would have argued for Iran given their declared war against US. The DPRK is a wholly separate issue and less of a threat, but not to the ROK. Syria is not a threat to the US, but everything that we thought was true about Iraq we know to be true about Syria. I wasn't the decisor here.

The fact that we have been finding chemical weapons simply proves that Saddam did not destroy his chemical arsenal. Which is what was claimed all along.

Yes, the invasion plan was quite effective but you might want to consider switching to decaf. No, most Army invasion plans specifically do not contain an exit strategy. The invasion plan was to enter Iraq, neutralize the Iraqi leadership, neutralize the Iraqi military, ensure minimal damage to Iraqi oil infrastructure and to take and hold the country. All that was accomplished in relatively short order. The plans for afterwards are a wholly separate issue. The only invasion plans that included an exit were the USMC plans, and they almost always do.

SIOP is TS/SCI or higher in some cases. Are you claiming to hold those clearances?

quote:

wholly separate issue

Well then the wholly separate issue kind of flaws your whole "effective" scenerio doesn't it?

That's like me saying, "I'm going to go into your house and start a fire. But me getting out afterward is a wholly separate issue".

Not with regards to war planning, but I have in fact held certain clearances with a special customer whom I can't reveal. Sounds James Bond when you type it out. In other words, I was priveledged to be allowed in the room.

I'll pass on your references to O-5's as a lower pay grade to my friends. They'll get a kick out of it.

Oh, funny that you consider NK to be less of a threat than Iraq. That is absolutely hilarious.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
Well then the wholly separate issue kind of flaws your whole "effective" scenerio doesn't it?

Not, it's not at all relevant - which is the point. The DPRK and Iraq are not comparable scenarios. Of course, if you're referring to the latter time I said that, then it again stands. An invasion plan is exactly that, a plan for an invasion. We invade. You are of course aware of that fact that war plans come from separate departments, yes? So you would therefore know that the people who plan the invasion are not the same people who deal with all of the details on the ground afterwards. Which begs the question why you're trying to conflate the two.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
That's like me saying, "I'm going to go into your house and start a fire. But me getting out afterward is a wholly separate issue".

If you want to reduce it to wholly irrelevant analogies feel free to do so. But that is not an equivalent scenario.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
Not with regards to war planning, but I have in fact held certain clearances with a special customer whom I can't reveal. Sounds James Bond when you type it out. In other words, I was priveledged to be allowed in the room.

I know exactly how it works. Which likely means that you held a temporary clearance for specific information. That is not at all the same thing as a full clearance and certainly not one that gives you access to the data we're talking about. If your friends talked about it in your presence, that's a serious offense.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
I'll pass on your references to O-5's as a lower pay grade to my friends. They'll get a kick out of it.

Feel free. As a former O-5 I know exactly how that pay grade is ranked. Of course, your friends will also understand what you seem not to. It's where you begin doing a lot more work, but you're still low on the totem pole as far as most things go. My reduction in rank was voluntary in order to enter the CHC.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
Oh, funny that you consider NK to be less of a threat than Iraq. That is absolutely hilarious.

No, that's actually the considered opinion of many people in the intelligence and defense industry. It also is true. You specifically asked about a threat to the US. The DPRK has less ability to harm the US or US interest than Iraq was believed to have had. The DPRK is a serious threat to the ROK and their other neighbors. The original DOD estimate that their missiles could hit California have been called into question and their ability to turn Seoul into ashes hasn't changed. Last time I checked they had tens of thousands of rockets and artillery pieces aimed at Seoul.

“It’s irrelevant, it’s inaccurate, and it’s incorrect”. This seems to be your mantra.

I’ve really been trying to have a conversation with you, but the fact that you don’t concede a bit in your views leads me to the realization that your views are more hard-line, and not so much fact based.

My clearance is TS by the way. I should have stated that. Yes, the other clearances were temporary.

I just got off the phone with one of the O-5’s I was talking about, and he told me that continuing in dialogue with you is, and I quote, “wandering into a dark and insane abyss”. I won’t get into his confusion as to how an O-5 can retire, then “voluntarily’ return as a 1st lieutenant, because the language was unfavorable.

Nor will I mention what was said about your comment about being an “area specialist with State”. Further, your comments about “solid and effective” invasion plan for Iraq got quite a giggle.

Regardless, I see myself as someone that wants to speak for the side that is being drowned out by the BS hard-line conservative minds in this world. However, it’s clear to me that your intention is not to discuss, but to tell everyone else how wrong they are. Reread your posts. You’ll see what I mean. A few times, you even tell Sniper, your protégé, where he has misspoken.

It just seems to me that your hard-line, uncompromising stance is what drives you, more than your willingness to discuss different points of view.

I could go on and on with you. But that’s all I would be doing. Going on and on.

I can sense your answer now. Eagerly typing into your PDA with your little black plastic pencil tool, “I don’t really care what you think ROT”.

Again, ignoring petty insults and personal comments.

So you want me to concede to something that is wrong? That's rather odd. You seem to be trying to convince me of your views based solely on your views rather than any strength of facts or reasoned argument.

Clearly your O-5 friend isn't at all familiar with the Chaplain Corps. You can't go in at any rank above O-1 or O-2 even if you were a flag officer beforehand (not that I am aware of any flag officers who did so). His and your ignorance is not my concern, nor are either of your issues with my work history. He can feel free to disagree with my assessment of the plans that I saw, but clearly you can't since at best you have hearsay evidence - hearsay that you're apparently not even legally permitted to know about until it is either FOIA'ed, scrubbed or going through the DC process.

Your opinion of yourself is all well and good, but you have once again engaged in assumptions about me and done so erroneously. That's your concern and not mine. I wasn't aware that I had any sort of protege, and again I have no problem calling things as I either believe them to be or know them to be. I'm always more than happy to correct myself if I am wrong, and am always open for new information. So far you haven't given any and act offended when I disagree with you. If you can't handle that, that's again your concern.

So if you want to discuss, feel free. But try and drop the whole aggrieved martyr bit and recognize that you're speaking solely for yourself, just as everyone else here is doing. If you want to know my intentions, ask.

Oh, my PDA has a very nice keyboard but this is being typed on my laptop.

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
“It’s irrelevant, it’s inaccurate, and it’s incorrect”. This seems to be your mantra.

I’ve really been trying to have a conversation with you, but the fact that you don’t concede a bit in your views leads me to the realization that your views are more hard-line, and not so much fact based.

My clearance is TS by the way. I should have stated that. Yes, the other clearances were temporary.

I just got off the phone with one of the O-5’s I was talking about, and he told me that continuing in dialogue with you is, and I quote, “wandering into a dark and insane abyss”. I won’t get into his confusion as to how an O-5 can retire, then “voluntarily’ return as a 1st lieutenant, because the language was unfavorable.

Nor will I mention what was said about your comment about being an “area specialist with State”. Further, your comments about “solid and effective” invasion plan for Iraq got quite a giggle.

Regardless, I see myself as someone that wants to speak for the side that is being drowned out by the BS hard-line conservative minds in this world. However, it’s clear to me that your intention is not to discuss, but to tell everyone else how wrong they are. Reread your posts. You’ll see what I mean. A few times, you even tell Sniper, your protégé, where he has misspoken.

It just seems to me that your hard-line, uncompromising stance is what drives you, more than your willingness to discuss different points of view.

I could go on and on with you. But that’s all I would be doing. Going on and on.

I can sense your answer now. Eagerly typing into your PDA with your little black plastic pencil tool, “I don’t really care what you think ROT”.

It seems to me that you want to speak for the terrorists and other scumbags who would harm the US, it's interests and it's people...

What I can't figure out is exactly why you would think that those dirtbag types would need a voice???

Do you honesly believe that the muderous scumbag types and those who would aide and abet them actually have a worthwhile point of view???



EDIT: Interesting article here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213521,00.html

Deals with the release of a well known terrorist as ransom for a German hostage.

What does this terrorist do?? High tails it back to Beruit and rejoins Hezbollah...

I am always interested in the views of people who have obviously never, ever experienced any violence in their lives, except perhaps at the "Go stand in the corner and think about what you have done mister" level.
This, coupled with their almost tragic inability to separate what they have been taught, at their safe, comfortable tables in the local coffee shop, or perhaps the ones in the student union, with the brutal reality of life today, or yesteryear,simply brings out in stark relief what we have come to today.
I really believe that France has infiltrated our fair land and impregnated too many of our fair maidens, thus producing this terrible confliction...
Ahem: Gentlemen: Bush has, as i have stated before, made determinations, choices, that are simply an insult to the intelligence of most of us.
He has, I believe, used his own intelligence, or lack thereof, as a barometer for his decisions.
Which tends to make me both cringe and, at times, do a slow burn.
Now, before i insult my friends here, I do agree that we need Bush now, as no one has ever needed him before. He has seen to this..
For without him, or someone with his tenacity, we will all suffer the consequences...
Now, I do believe that this was coming our way anyway, he just accelerated things a bit.
However, Iraq simply was not and is not the place we should be right now. Now,we have no choice..
I believe we are there because Bush had anger that had never dissapated due to Saddams' effort at killing his Dad. I understand those feelings completely, and perhaps i may have acted in a like manner. But, I simply would have had him assasinated. Why use a bazooka when a pellet rifle would suffice.
I used to be a Liberal, when that definition meant something much different than it does today.
I lean much more to the right today simply because I know, not think, I know that the Liberals of today would cheerfully toss my body to whatever wolves were howling at the door if it meant thye would not have to face them themselves,At least not right away.
This would continue until there was no one left but the Liberals, and then they would spend the time they have left not fighting or defending themselves , but blaming us, who they had already sacrificed by their own cowardice, for not being there to save them..
This is how far they have fallen..
As for Bush being compared to Lincoln, I sincerely hope 'Ol Abe didn't hear that fine insult...
My own personal analogy or observation of Bushs' invasion of Iraq goes like this, and makes Conservatives angry, because they see it as an insult, and Liberals just as angry because they didn't think of it..
I said one fine morning I was looking out the back window and saw my neighbor Bush climbing over my back fence and sneaked up on my best dog and kicked his unsuspecting a$$ over the backyard fence..
This immediately infuriated me so I ran to my garage, got in my car and drove clear down to Florida and rang the doorbell and when he answered, I punched his dumb a$$ brother in the mouth..
This analogy will not win you friends wherever and whoever you tell it to..
But, having said that, I still will take President Bush over any and all Liberals offered, either singly or collectively..
In any discussion like this-pertaining to Israel, I invariably bow to the experience,and the knowledge that Geist brings to the table..and his unfailing honesty and sense of fairness..(Again, I have never met the man and am not married to his sister.. )
Just on this subject mind you... I will and have before differed with his opinions concerning other matters...
ROT: There comes a time in any discussion/argument where you simply have to either "cut and run" or sit back and reflect and admit that in this instance, concerning this particular subject, you just may be wrong..
I know that this is a difficult thing to consider, and the admitting of such will be a new experience. i suggest you embrace it, savour the feeling, because until you admit that there are other people who have had more realistic life experiences than you have had and are likely to ever have, you just keep digging the hole deeper and deeper, until nothing is left except to fill it in after you...
Now, I take these exceptions with all of you here, simply because you have allowed me this luxury in the past, and i believe it is because you have seen that I speak from the heart with no particular axe to grind and a genuine liking caring attitude for all of you that i know, and for the rest, i hope to reach that level of trust some time in the future..
I also understand that what i have said here may well peeve some of you somewhat and if i get a little in return, well that is your right and i expect no less....
take care:
Leep Out:

You're a hilarious character on this board Leep. There are times that I don't get your jokes, but I smile, as I read, nonetheless. I don't know why. Might be all the emoticons rolling around. Might be that you have little regard for paragraph spacing. Might be due to the fact that I know you mean well.

You left one option out with regards to discussions such as these. There also comes a time during a discussion where you get the sense that the people you are discussing the topic with would rather argue, condemn, and ridicule than discuss. At that point, it does become time to find another venue.

I believe I do speak for some of the more open-minded people reading this forum (many of you refer to them as liberals, loony left, etc.). Regardless of the fact that hardly any of these loonies follow up any of my posts with an "at-a-boy". Not necessary. I know everyone reading these posts can't share your same view.

The point is, that using a text forum such as this to make points to counter those of a majority, allows that majority the ability to pick and choose what to respond to, and how to inaccurately translate the points. Hence so many, "What I meant when I said that was....".

For me to post opinions from my perspective mind you, and have two or three people exclaim, "that is inaccurate", is absolutely inexcusable. My perspective is inaccurate? It's comical, once you get past the appalling aspect that is. For me to post other information passed on to me by military personnel, who I deem to be unbiased with regards to the topic, and then have these contributions referred to as "liberal propaganda", or inaccuracies, is similarly as absurd. And again, becomes quite comical.

A friend of mine told me I should be expending my energy on something else. He said that it is a waste of time to have a discussion with people that have such contempt for those with varying opinions. I tend to agree. But I’m sitting here drinking my coffee on a Saturday morning, so I really don’t have anything better to do.

A good example of such contempt is your last post, Leep. Although it is hidden among your complimentary references to "everyone posting here", your disdain for the loony left is clear. And your comments to state that you care for each and every person on here, does nothing to overshadow your references to liberals as cowards (see, you’re referring to me). Nor does it overshadow your comments that I am ill-equipped to have discussions with those here who discount my points without consideration.

See, through discussion, I have found common ground with some who take the time to read. I assume this from comments such as, “Well, I’m with you there”, or “I see where you are coming from”, or “I think what Danger means to say is….”; However infrequent those replies may be.

However, it does become tiresome after a while to be referred to as the one who is ill-equipped to discuss, or the coward that has never experienced violence in his life.

The good thing about this board however, is the effect that one person can have on the other. I tend to believe that once one person does something that affects someone else (say, posting on a forum for instance), that something affects everyone beyond that person in a chain. Thus, the little seeds I plant here, although hard to get set in the soil with all the bulldozers roaming around, do go beyond all of you and affect those around you. Don’t know in what way, but hopefully something good will come of it.

Further Leep, you in particular bring joy to my life outside of the Internet. I was discussing your comment with friends at a party the other night and I referenced your comment stating, “Geist will slay you with facts”. One of my friend’s wives, who is just about one of the quietest people in the room, looked up from her Calistoga water to say, “Someone’s been playing a little too much Dungeons and Dragons”.

Thank you Leep.

Danger out.

Dungeons and Dragons?
I've never played it -never even seen the game.
And your friend was probably one of the quietest people in the room because she didn't want to waste a drop of her very expensive water and all the hot air moving about the room was putting it in imminent danger of vaporation...
You have to remember to not take everything that is written, at least by me, to heart.
Although, i do agree with your assertion that my assertion that Liberals, extreme Liberals that is, do have a propensity to sit around discussing Rome as it burns down around them..
I'm not certain that I would lump you in with that extreme group...
I do agree that I have little time or empathy for those that would lie down and give up this country, and any others without a fight..
There are times in life when you have to make a stand and there are also times whrn you will have to defend your views, your family , your honor with some sort of violemce. Perhaps vocally, perhaps physically.
And, I ask you this in all honesty, what would you do in the event you had to repel an intruder that is bent on destroying all that you love simply for enough money to get the next fix?
or perhaps it is an individual or a group of individuals who have lost all respect for human life and view people as only temporary obstacles to overcome in their quest fot domination, and personal effects, let us not forget that..
You state your purpose is to make people think, to question the values we hold close, simply because they do not reflect your own.
Yes, I understand that the same could be said for most -well all of us here.
But, at least we. well I am up front with that desire.
A friend of yours told you this, and that.. you seem to be fond of quoting those friends or acquaintences...which again leads me to believe that you do this because of a lack of real world experience....
This is not a condemnation of you as a person or as a debater, it is simply an observation of you I have gained from all this.
I believe that you are a decent, honest, caring individual...And you could have responded in a more "Qualified" manner to my little rants.. Oh, and quit making fun of my paragraphs, you sure know how to hurt a guy...

If you insist on posting with the modifier, "From my perspective" then turning around and expecting people not to question it simply because you introduce it as such is a little disingenuous.. You obviously expect us to take what you write seriously and to accept it as fact.. You certainly quote enough outside, though unnamed sources..
One thing you will have to get over ROT-is your obvious belief that your intelligence and your abilities supercede those of us that frequent this place, or any other..
You show frustration with what-well I need to qualify and quantify this now i suppose, so from now on take what i write as only coming from me personally. It is not fair for me to include everyone else in my observations and lump them in with my own feelings..anyway your obvious frustration is understandable but surely you must realize by now that there are people who exist in this world with a better perspective on some matters and that we must occasionally put aside our own absolute certainty that our version of events is the only one that is correct.
I have to apologize for my sometimes rambling prose...I have to lean forward to squint to see what it is i am writing and i promise that after X-Mas I will get another pair of glasses, ones that allow me to see what the heck I am writing...its either that or taking them off and placing my face inches from the screen.
(You will probably recognize this as a feeble attempt to curry sympathy, i got it from a Liberal web site)
Why do you condemn argument as a venue for people here to make their points..when an argument is a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point..
Condemnation is also an equally valid method to make a point...
To ridicule your point or you as an individual is not valid and has no place here or any where else..if i engage in it, I assure you that there is absolutely no malice involved..I just use it to make my point and to temper whatever criticism i am currently engaged in.
Now you wanna see an example of condemnation, ridicule, downright meanness, go back in the archives and read anything that Gandalf and i engaged in a few years ago...
not somehting that I am particularly proud of, although it idd evolve into somehting very positive and i believe we both came away better men for it..I learned a little about myself, not all of it welcomed..but there it was.
I also became friends with someone that I was vehemently opposed to...although it has been a long time since i have had any correspondence with him, I still think about him from time to time and hope he is well..
Oh, quit calling us loonies, thats not nice.either..
And, if you are looking for an atta boy, you will only get one from me for your obvious sincerity, and for your ability to express yourself in a clear, concise, literate manner, not for the content of such.
Oh, you will notice that i sometimes get off track. That is simply because i do not devote any time to preparation when i write, i just sit down and write until I run out of words, hard to believe that ever happens huh?
So, for those that sit and write and agonize over what they put down here, more power to you, I just sit down and let 'er rip...
I try to use humor here -mostly to mitigate any hard feelings that are certain to erupt, on both sides. And, i know that you cannot help but feel singled out for our collective comtempt. I assure you that is not the case just kinda looks that way sometimes.
One thing that people certainly have come to see about me, for whatever it is worth, I simply cannot sustain any level of anger or vitriol for any extended length of time, ergo my feeble attempts at humor, on occasion..
But, the times when I do have caused hair to suddenly go white, and old ladies to swoon..
Hmm, seems i remember a time when I made the young ladies swoon just as easily..
Well, I am suddenly out of words, (Hurrah)
Tough for me to sit any longer..what I put my poor body through over the years, it is a miracle i am still here.
(Collective groans, "Oh, man I hope Leep isn't going to tell us all that **** again" )
Anyway,, glad me had this talk and I hope that I will not cause you any more mental stress, I mean that sincerely..you are kinda outnumbered here.I know the feeling...believe me...
Take care:
Leep Out:

Leep I’ll simply reply to your comments that were actually questions. I’d elaborate, but I know you don’t like to go back and forth.

Dungeons & Dragons is a role playing game that was popular in the 70’s. At least that’s when I was playing it at recess with my friends when nobody could muster a game of kickball.

Your question: “What would you do in the event you had to repel an intruder that is bent on destroying all that you love simply for enough money to get the next fix?”

My answer: Kill the f-cker.

Your comment: “You state your purpose is to make people think, to question the values we hold close, simply because they do not reflect your own.”

My answer: I’m not sure if I’m understanding you, but if you mean to say, “You state your purpose is to make people think, to question the values they hold close, simply because of the fact that they are different than your own”, then my answer is, I don't ask you to question your beliefs just because they are different that I believe. I ask you to question your beliefs as much as anyone should question their beliefs. Questioning your beliefs allows your beliefs to make more sense; both to yourself, and to those who you explain your beliefs to. Not sure if that was your question, but that’s my best attempt at answering it.

Your comment: “If you insist on posting with the modifier, "From my perspective" then turning around and expecting people not to question it simply because you introduce it as such is a little disingenuous.”

My answer: I do not expect people to accept my perspective. My point was that people have discounted it as an inaccurate statement. As in, they disagree that this is my perspective. You see my point?

Your comment: “One thing you will have to get over ROT” (Call me Danger) “-is your obvious belief that your intelligence and your abilities supersede those of us that frequent this place, or any other.”

My answer: Do you really believe that this is how I feel? If I felt that I was more intelligent than anyone on this board, why would I continue to reply? Just to continuously debase myself with the intellectually inept? Just for thrills? Rest assured that I do not feel this way at all. I feel that I am not being listened to. That a few of the people responding are quicker to start replying before they’re done reading, than to read slowly and try to gather my inference. But no, we all have a lot to learn from one another. And I do not believe that anyone on this board is the superior of the other. For anyone to think that what they type on here makes them superior is a gross psychological issue that needs to be addressed.

Your comment: “we must occasionally put aside our own absolute certainty”. Again, most of my responses have been to point out that people are not taking other people’s perspectives into account. Absolutely none of them have been to state that I am absolutely certain about any opinion.

Your question: “Why do you condemn argument as a venue for people here to make their points?”.

My answer: This is an issue of semantics. When I compare discussion to argument, my intent is to imply that one is friendly and eager to communicate in nature, and the latter is aggressive and condescending. The point I am trying to make is that this discussion, in it’s context and location (a game forum) should be not taken so vehemently serious that one needs to resort to condescending name calling and ridicule; especially towards one another within the forum.

ROT, you really should consider dropping this whole "Aggrieved martyr" complex your trying to create for yourself. Recognize that you speak for yourself and only for yourself. If someone agrees or disagrees, then they will let you know. As it is, you're coming off as trying to project a borderline personality.

If you want to "expend energy" elsewhere then by all means feel free to do so. Likewise feel free to stay and try to continue to engage, but do so as a reasonable adult. Opinions are not facts, and can of course be inaccurate and just plain wrong. The nice thing is that given time, experience and knowledge that opinions can change and be re-formed. We all have opinions and reasons for those opinions. Some people have have a good deal of experience and knowledge in different areas, and recognizing that you lack that knowledge isn't a slight but an invitation go and learn. Now I've been assuming that you're adult enough to handle disagreement, and it is rather unfortunate that seems to not the be case. So perhaps it would be best for you to take some time off and get some perspective. This is an Internet forum, and should be not be given such weighty significance that you seem to attach to it.

But by all means, please stop with the foolish assumptions about people who you do not know. Just as we extend you the courtesy of taking your posts at face value, I would suggest that you do the same for others rather than trying to assume you know what people are thinking and what their motivations are. When you want to know something, ask.

I had an AWESOME time over at the Huffington Post Blog...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/so-is-tortu...daughte_b_29538.html

I was constantly amazed how the Fanatical Left is nearly identical to the Fanatical Right...

So in other words, you found some common ground?

quote:

Originally posted by ROT_Danger:
So in other words, you found some common ground?

In a way..

We finally agreed on one thing..

That I was right and they were wrong..

There was only the basic agreement to disagree, but at least I wasn't banned, like I was from a few other forums (PLATOON, LIBERAL WHACKOS, etc etc) So, I count that as a win...

Hahahaa. Is tere really a forum named, "LIBERAL WACKOS"? I gotta join.

It's interesting how the dialogue went on that forum in relation to this forum.

You've written in this forum about how we need to deal with Al Qaeda in Iraq now that they are there. And not dwell on the issue of whether or not we caused the Al Qaeda presence in Iraq. It was a few posts back where you said something to the effect of, "Well, the fact is they're there now, and we're there now, so we need to deal with them NOW". I'm sure I didn't quote you exactly.

Anyway, then on that forum, you say we need to be proactive in stopping terrorists from hitting potential targets, and torture them when we THINK they might be planning something, or have information that gives us that impression.

The interesting part is, on this forum you state that the administration's lack of foresight should be overlooked (don't dwell on it), but on that forum, you're an advocate for foresight.

So it sounds like you're saying it's okay for us to overlook the possibility of bad that could happen in some instances (Al Qaeda insurgencies growing in Iraq), but we need to be cautious of the bad that could happen in others (terrorists planning a bombing).

SODsniper,
That was a tour de force you put on at Huffington's. The poor bastards didn't know what hit them. I'm not agreeing with your views, but none the less, I was impressed.
The bad thing is, some of those "liberal weenies" actually like you now.
And how come you didn't use SODsniper as a username?

quote:

Originally posted by wombat50:
And how come you didn't use SODsniper as a username?

Could you imagine the uproar if he actually used that name.