🚀 go-pugleaf

"John Gilmer" <gilmer@crosslink.net> wrote in
news:3e36788a$0$2766@dingus.crosslink.net: 

> 
> "Monte" <AnybodyButGeeDubya@in2004.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9311274C625C7Monte@216.168.3.44...
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53222-
>> 2003Jan28.html
>>
>> Yeppers, "American war planes attacked enemy positions
>> with B-1 bombers, F-16s and AC-130 gunships, King said."
>>
>> And this bunch of incompetent assholes think they are
>> going to free-wheel it into Baghdad?

> 
> Where did you EVER get the idea that the United States
> would "free-wheel" into Baghdad?

Well, you might get that impression by watching and listening 
to the spokesmen.  Oh sure, they look solemn and say this will 
not be easy yadda yadda, and in the same breath go on to how 
all will be hunky-dory because the civilian and military will 
rise as one and smite the awful Hussein.  Highly unlikely.

What's more likely is that Saddam's troops will bivouac in the 
cities and we'll either have to level the towns, killing all 
civilians or many of them in order to take the army or we go 
in and street fight it.  In which case there will be many US 
casualties.  I doubt that is what this bunch of chicken-hawks 
wants.  If we sustain significant casualties GeeDub is history 
which means presidents Rove,Cheney and Rummysfeld are history 
as well.

> 
>> What the hell is going on?
> 
> To a first approximate, a repeat of the First Gulf War.

Hardly!  Do you think at all? Remember clearly?  Saddams whole 
freaking army was out in the desert of Kuwait dug into the 
sands.  Not bright, and you can bet the farm they won't make 
that mistake again. 

>>
>> Roughly 80,000 reservists headed to or at combat areas. 
>> I'll tell you what THAT means, it means this
>> administration is lying out their nether regions about the
>> military situation.  the fact is that our military is
>> stretched to the breaking point. 
> 
> Reallly?    Was it "stretched to the breaking point" in the
> first Gulf War are was enough fire power put in place to
> ensure a nearly "bloodless" (our blood) victory?
> 

According to such people as Gen'l Swarzchopf, yes it was.  Now 
you have to add in the troops deployed in Afghanistan as well 
as the thousands being used for security in and around our 
foreign bases and embassies.  Christ, don't you research 
anything?

>>
>> But for OIL, petty personal reasons and political
>> expediency the Council of Presidents and their puppet are
>> willing to sacrifice American lives.

> How soon we forget 911!
> 

Pray tell all the world what the goddam hell Iraq had to do 
with 9/11?  bin Laden, al Qaida Saudi money THEY had to do 
with 9/11.  Now tell me what has Bush done to any of them?  
Not very bloody much.  bin Laden is safe in Pakistan, whose 
troops regularly shoot at our forces when we cme near the 
border, but that's okay Musharraf is our friend. 



>> ....IT'S ALL CLINTONS FAULT!!!!!
> 
> Now you are starting to make sense!
> 

And now you are sorely looking like a foolish ass.

Monte