Ok so say you're the President of the United States right now. how would you approach the situation differently? what things do you think have been totaly funked up and what things have been done right?

I don't know specifics. I suppose I would have planned better rescue missions so those Navy SEALs didn't die. I'm not really sure what better Bush could have done. I was for the war than and I am for the war now. I don't know why everyone says it's a mess over there. Seems like everything is going pretty much how we expected. We defeated the Iraqi army, seized control of the country and are now trying to make a more free, constitution based Iraq. We are facing resistants among terrorists and insurgants but I think that was expected.

I don't really know of anything specific I would change. Maybe if I were in the presidents actual shoes I could have information to data that would give me a much better prespective on the actual fighting that is going on and the military strategy behind it. But I think our troops are doin a bang up job over there. God bless them for doing so.


_________________

tat6789 wrote:

i gave this job to Team because I know he doesn't have a soul.

I'm all for the troops. Not a soul could have forseen the outcome thus far. One thing I would have done would be to send more troops in the initial attack to protect the priceless artifacts looted from the museums. These are ancient artifacts of the Babylonian empire, which are God only knows where now.


_________________

My foreign policy would consist of killing and assassinating people that want to inflict harm upon America. This lets us keep our civil liberties at home, and saves time, effort, and money on trying to defend low-risk American targets.

When encountering large groups of terrorists, such as those found in Afghanistan and Iraq, Army intervention would be necessary. Bush understands this, but is doing a piss poor job in carrying it out. Throughout the past 4 years we have seen nothing but American soldiers that are overworked, underprotected, and put in more danger than they should have to be. He has cut soldier salary, benefits, and equipment for fucks sake.

Now that the terrorists are implementing guerilla tactics like those used in Vietnam, we need to find a new combat strategy. One that does not involve bombing civilians in fucking Pakistan and almost starting World War 3. We must also simultaneously provide aid for the civilians of Iraq and focus on NOT killing them if we plan on winning this war. Even then, the war will take decades to fully resolve.

Brute force will not win in Iraq. Intelligence will.

Personaly I think the Iraq war has been handled very well on the american side. The actual military vs. military war was a stunning victory, then the real problems started. I think that it's only a matter of time now. We have to wait for the iraqis to assemble a capable non-corrupt and efficient govornment, and a solid military. If coalition forces pull out anytime soon i'm sure the insurgents will topple the govornment and install another brutal regime. I'm expecting american troops to be there till at least 2010, although they probably won't be as active as they are now.

Yeah there have been alot of problems, but it's excepted. it's a fucking war, people die, alot less people are dying in this one than in alot of the other wars in the last century.

Shabaz wrote:

My foreign policy would consist of killing and assassinating people that want to inflict harm upon America. This lets us keep our civil liberties at home, and saves time, effort, and money on trying to defend low-risk American targets.

When encountering large groups of terrorists, such as those found in Afghanistan and Iraq, Army intervention would be necessary. Bush understands this, but is doing a piss poor job in carrying it out. Throughout the past 4 years we have seen nothing but American soldiers that are overworked, underprotected, and put in more danger than they should have to be. He has cut soldier salary, benefits, and equipment for fucks sake.

Now that the terrorists are implementing guerilla tactics like those used in Vietnam, we need to find a new combat strategy. One that does not involve bombing civilians in fucking Pakistan and almost starting World War 3. We must also simultaneously provide aid for the civilians of Iraq and focus on NOT killing them if we plan on winning this war. Even then, the war will take decades to fully resolve.

Brute force will not win in Iraq. Intelligence will.

Yeah, well this war will not only be decades old it will be older than that by more than a few centuries. This war has been raging for damn near as lond as wesern civilization has existed. We just happen to be the ones in charge right now. It's a stupid war. War is stupid, but as Kurt Vonnegut states in Slaughterhouse five you may as well protest glaciers or flooding, because war is a natural event that happens regardless of the where when and why. Who wants ice cream?


_________________

assgoblin wrote:

Yeah there have been alot of problems, but it's excepted. it's a fucking war, people die, alot less people are dying in this one than in alot of the other wars in the last century.

I agree. WWII set such a high standard for warfare I think Bush would be showing off to try and match it, and I congratulate him for pulling off such a stunning war in the small scale category.



Last edited by Team_180B on Feb 02, 2006 - 01:36 AM; edited 2 times in total
_________________
Bigger Than Big, Stronger Than Strong

Really the only major problem I have with the war is that it encourages Bush to wire-tap phones and detain U.S. citizens without being charged with anything.


I'm brown and not conservative. I'm one turban away from being Ahmed's bitch.

realisticly i bet various government bodies have been doing the phone thing secretly for decades, these assholes just happened to be the ones to get caught. idk about the detaining without charges though, that's pretty messed up. i'd be careful drying my hair if i were you man.

Shabaz wrote:

Really the only major problem I have with the war is that it encourages Bush to wire-tap phones and detain U.S. citizens without being charged with anything.


I'm brown and not conservative. I'm one turban away from being Ahmed's bitch.

In an era where so many terrorist acts are possible. I really couldn't give a crap if the CIA listens in on a conversation with me and my mom. I mean they found phone records of the terrorists involved with 9/11 for up to 15 hours before the attacks. Imagine if we were able to stop them. Why handicap this administration from fighting terror?

A funny story, I'm taking US institutions and we were talking about this exact subject. One of the cute, stupid girls goes "I heard that if you say like some key words like bomb, or president that it clicks on and records your conversation for the CIA to hear." And than I'm like "Yea we've all seen enemy of the state" everyone laughed. Except for the girl, she was mad. Heh.


_________________

tat6789 wrote:

i gave this job to Team because I know he doesn't have a soul.

Team_180B wrote:

assgoblin wrote:

Yeah there have been alot of problems, but it's excepted. it's a fucking war, people die, alot less people are dying in this one than in alot of the other wars in the last century.

I agree. WWII set such a high standard for warfare I think Bush would be showing off to try and match it, and I congratulate him for pulling off such a stunning war in the small scale category.

Hahahaha.


_________________
Tell me how he died.

I will tell you how he lived.

Pads4Life wrote:

Shabaz wrote:

Really the only major problem I have with the war is that it encourages Bush to wire-tap phones and detain U.S. citizens without being charged with anything.


I'm brown and not conservative. I'm one turban away from being Ahmed's bitch.

In an era where so many terrorist acts are possible. I really couldn't give a crap if the CIA listens in on a conversation with me and my mom. I mean they found phone records of the terrorists involved with 9/11 for up to 15 hours before the attacks. Imagine if we were able to stop them. Why handicap this administration from fighting terror?

A funny story, I'm taking US institutions and we were talking about this exact subject. One of the cute, stupid girls goes "I heard that if you say like some key words like bomb, or president that it clicks on and records your conversation for the CIA to hear." And than I'm like "Yea we've all seen enemy of the state" everyone laughed. Except for the girl, she was mad. Heh.

I guess it's just where I draw the line. Emiliano Zapata said "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." There is no reason that the authorities of the United States cannot get a proper warrant to tap phones. If we really are only monitoring "the bad people" then getting a warrant should be easy.

The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." If you allow the constitution to be raped for the sake of "protection", then we might as well start banning free speech and the right to bear arms because they could fall in the wrong hands and lead to violence.

Once again, education of the American people is paramount.

i think it was the NSA (National Security Agency) and not the CIA.

Once again, i think intelligence agencies don't play by the rules all the time and they never will, that's what makes them effective. i think the NSA, CIA, FBI, whoever should listen in on phone calls. BUT i think that if they do hear some extremely dangerous conversations, they should get a warrent, do a legal phone tap, then if they have legaly obtained evidence they can put somebody in custody. Bush's people found ways to circumvent the whole legal process and go from illegal wire tap to arrest, which i don't agree with. i mean i am a conservative and i support Bush totaly but this was a mistake.

I'm sure the CIA has secretly done very unconstitutional things in the past but they never decided that it was ok to just throw out the rules for good and do whatever the fuck they wanted, because we would have heard about it like we did here.

Shabaz wrote:

Pads4Life wrote:

Shabaz wrote:

Really the only major problem I have with the war is that it encourages Bush to wire-tap phones and detain U.S. citizens without being charged with anything.


I'm brown and not conservative. I'm one turban away from being Ahmed's bitch.

In an era where so many terrorist acts are possible. I really couldn't give a crap if the CIA listens in on a conversation with me and my mom. I mean they found phone records of the terrorists involved with 9/11 for up to 15 hours before the attacks. Imagine if we were able to stop them. Why handicap this administration from fighting terror?

A funny story, I'm taking US institutions and we were talking about this exact subject. One of the cute, stupid girls goes "I heard that if you say like some key words like bomb, or president that it clicks on and records your conversation for the CIA to hear." And than I'm like "Yea we've all seen enemy of the state" everyone laughed. Except for the girl, she was mad. Heh.

I guess it's just where I draw the line. Emiliano Zapata said "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." There is no reason that the authorities of the United States cannot get a proper warrant to tap phones. If we really are only monitoring "the bad people" then getting a warrant should be easy.

The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." If you allow the constitution to be raped for the sake of "protection", then we might as well start banning free speech and the right to bear arms because they could fall in the wrong hands and lead to violence.

Once again, education of the American people is paramount.

I agree... except the right to bear arms is ridiculous. Ban that. please.


_________________
Tell me how he died.

I will tell you how he lived.

nish wrote:

I agree... except the right to bear arms is ridiculous. Ban that. please.

no