Good News for once

The Surge??!!!

"...all this time..."????!!!!! :eek:

How securely/desperately you "conservatives" cling, to POST-Rummy history!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rolleyes:


Rummy re-created the military to fight a new sort of war.
If you knew what an accomplishment it is to train that behemoth to do a new trick you would appreciate him more. Ansd a change that huge does not go off flawlessly.

All in all in t hundred years he will likely be seen as the best secDef ever.
 
Werbung:
Hum...

And who had been preventing energy independence since at the very least the creation of the Dept of Energy whose very creation was to encourage it ?

Thats right, it would be the left side of the aisle.
It's no wonder you (consistently) forget to post any facts to support your B.S.

:rolleyes:

"It was the Winter of 1981 and the country was just beginning to feel the sharp edges of the Reagan revolution. Denis Hayes, head of the fledgling Solar Energy Research Institute, was walking through the halls of the Department of Energy when an acquaintance came up to him and said, "Has Frank lowered the boom on you yet?" The Frank in question was an acting assistant secretary, but the boom, it turned out, was falling from the top. President Reagan had once been General Electric's most camera-ready tout, and his administration viewed alternative energy with open scorn. "They're going to kill your study," the gray-suited informant warned Hayes, before slipping down the corridor.

The study, a yearlong investigation by some of the nation's leading scientists, provided a convincing blueprint for a solar future. It showed that alternative energy could easily meet 28 percent of the nation's power needs by 2000. The only thing that solar and wind and other nonpolluting energy sources needed was a push, the study concluded -- the same research funding and tax credits provided to other energy industries, and a government committed to lead the way to reduced reliance on fossil fuels. But the messenger in the corridor signaled that the solar future would only be won with a little guerrilla warfare. Hayes phoned a colleague at his office in Golden, Colorado, and told him to make 100 copies of the study and circulate them around the country. Energy Secretary Jim Edwards killed the study, all right, but not before it had been published in the Congressional Record."

By the end of 1985, when Congress and the administration allowed tax credits for solar homes to lapse, the dream of a solar era had faded. The solar water heater President Carter had installed on the White House roof in 1979 was dismantled and junked. Solar water heating went from a billion-dollar industry to peanuts overnight; thousands of sun-minded businesses went bankrupt. "It died. It's dead," says Peter Barnes, whose San Francisco solar- installation business had 35 employees at its peak. "First the money dried up, then the spirit dried up," says Jim Benson, another solar activist of the day."

How sophomoric o' you, Skippy....starting-out a New Year, LYING, as usual...

:rolleyes:
 
It's no wonder you (consistently) forget to post any facts to support your B.S.

:rolleyes:



How sophomoric o' you, Skippy....starting-out a New Year, LYING, as usual...

:rolleyes:


Oh boy, I'm sure all those solar panels on the WHite House made all the difference.

What about offshore drilling ? Generations of op[position to this have not helped.

And nuclear ? Harry Reid has been successful in hamstringing safe housing of spend rods in Yucca Mth while the rest fight it hammer and tongs

And poor old clean coal, Biden in typical fashion butted heads with his top of ticket on this he calling for it while Obama wants to bankrupt any company attempting it. BUt generally except for Robby Byrd (WV senatror who has gotten legislation making low sulfer from the midwest harder to mine while his high sulfer is tolerated, the dems just HATE coal.

But anyone paying attention to current events already knows all this. And I'm pretty sure you do too. ;)
 
Pocket full of shells has it right for once. Our Great military is kicking some serious ass. Lets get a real president, that will not waiver in a cowardess fashion and send in the required troops we need to finish this " WAR " so that there will continue to be less American lives lost.
Easy, there, cowboy.....

We've been relying on the John-Wayne-option (i.e. killin' mosquitos with a sledge-hammer)...and, have the DEBT to prove it.

We need to start putting more emphasis on good, ol' fashioned police-workhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/30/abdulmutallab-plane-bomber-awlaki.....and, partner-UP on our efforts!​

"It's not glamorous work, but last year Interpol played a role in 4,500 arrests, including a war criminal from the former Yugoslavia and an al Qaeda terrorist connected to the Madrid train bombing."

The BUSHCO Years are OVER!!!!

We can (actually) start giving ourselves permission to start working SMARTER, again.​
 
Oh boy, I'm sure all those solar panels on the WHite House made all the difference.
No you don't.....as usual.....

:rolleyes:

My wife (at the time) & I had 3 solar hot-water panels, on-top-of our house, in Colorado (after taking-advantage of Carter's solar-credits).

She, her daughter, my son, and I, could each take a shower....back-to-back....and, never run-outta-hot-water!!!!!

Stick to what you know, pup.....as limited as that might be.

:rolleyes:
 
Dogtowner, I'm trying to 'NOT BE OBTUSE' about your answer/statement about Romney being the 'NEW TECHNIQUE DRIVER' for how this aggressive action was handled in IRAQ & Afghanistan...but how exactly is "ROMNEY" the genius behind:

1. Sending in such ill equipped National Guard Personnel into a war zone that has had such a huge cost in life and some many thousands wounded as never before

2. That the National Guard hasn't had the hand-to-hand combat training that the regular Army/Marine corps are taught, they handle our national disasters and are basic Military Police, fire fighters, flood/tornado clean up

3. Sending our National Guard/Army/Marines into that combat with the worst plan in known warfare and the ill equipped transport for both men/fuel/medic services

4. Rushing through IRAQ with no plan, no concept, no 'F'n idea about what to do when they {the enemy} just turned tail and ran off into the dunes and then to only sneak back at nightfall to reek havoc on the locals and armed forces just sitting around waiting to be ambushed

5. Infrastructure Services: Food/Water/Electricity/Sanitary Service/Doctors/Hospitals/Schools...

OMG, huge arsed surprise...you mean those locals would enjoy having those back...WELL IMAGINE THE SURPRISE WHEN THERE ISN'T A PLAN TO GET THOSE SERVICES ALL UP AND RUNNING...

Nope, never was and there still having problems...low this 7 years later:mad:
I'm quite sure that I wouldn't call Romney anything but a complete/utter BOOB and he's hardly the military genius that you've pegged him to be...but that's just IMO
 
Dogtowner, I'm trying to 'NOT BE OBTUSE' about your answer/statement about Romney being the 'NEW TECHNIQUE DRIVER' for how this aggressive action was handled in IRAQ & Afghanistan...
You dare question one o' THE FIGHTIN' ROMNEYS??!!!!!
667.gif



:eek:
 
Well pocket this is a fine kettle of fish that you got stirred up.:D

Hey we should welcome ANY good news.

If everyone will recall Bush was dead set against a time line to get out of Iraq until the political pressure put on by then candidate for President Obama turned up the heat. Then when Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq publicly confirmed that he agreed with Obama over Bush the "time horizon";) deal was done.

But now we are where we are. A new President and a dwindling commitment in the Bush quagmire known as Iraq. And we are now going to make a final hit at Al-Qaeda strongholds and then implement the pre-explained exit strategy.

Do I agree with Popeye that it's true we could save a lot of money & some lives if we didn't do this short term escalation thing in Afghanistan? Yes.

But I also see a situation where it will do some good in hurting some more bad guys and tells the Afghan government that they are on the clock to get their house in order. It also inoculates our President from any credible attacks from the Right that he is one who will never take any steps of an offensive nature.

So I have no problem with Liberals that are miffed about this escalation and want to send that message via some complaining... that gets their voice heard.

But at the end of the day all Liberals, Progressives, Moderates & Independents need to be honest and admit that the reality is that if the Republicans were in power not only would THIS escalation be much larger... it would also be much broader. It would not surprise me one bit that with "REPUBLICAN STRATEGERY" we'd be trying to send troops to 2 or 3 additional countries on invasions all at the same time if the Dems had not taken over.


We were left with big problems click on pic for details...
 
Dogtowner, I'm trying to 'NOT BE OBTUSE' about your answer/statement about Romney being the 'NEW TECHNIQUE DRIVER' for how this aggressive action was handled in IRAQ & Afghanistan...but how exactly is "ROMNEY" the genius behind:

1. Sending in such ill equipped National Guard Personnel into a war zone that has had such a huge cost in life and some many thousands wounded as never before

2. That the National Guard hasn't had the hand-to-hand combat training that the regular Army/Marine corps are taught, they handle our national disasters and are basic Military Police, fire fighters, flood/tornado clean up

3. Sending our National Guard/Army/Marines into that combat with the worst plan in known warfare and the ill equipped transport for both men/fuel/medic services

4. Rushing through IRAQ with no plan, no concept, no 'F'n idea about what to do when they {the enemy} just turned tail and ran off into the dunes and then to only sneak back at nightfall to reek havoc on the locals and armed forces just sitting around waiting to be ambushed

5. Infrastructure Services: Food/Water/Electricity/Sanitary Service/Doctors/Hospitals/Schools...

OMG, huge arsed surprise...you mean those locals would enjoy having those back...WELL IMAGINE THE SURPRISE WHEN THERE ISN'T A PLAN TO GET THOSE SERVICES ALL UP AND RUNNING...

Nope, never was and there still having problems...low this 7 years later:mad:
I'm quite sure that I wouldn't call Romney anything but a complete/utter BOOB and he's hardly the military genius that you've pegged him to be...but that's just IMO


Rummy, not Romney. If I got that wrong before (wouldnt be the forst time) then whoops for me.
#1 thats the problem relying on this sort of crew but that was the dem's idea to begin with.
#2 they were trained but its different in treal life also refer to #1
# 3 like I said RUmmy had to reconfigure our military on the fly, and he did it
#4 the enemy WAS trhe populace, insurgents, including Hussein's Republican Guard. nobody anticipated this but once they sorted it out things were rapidly reconfigured.

if you understood what they guy did you would be amazed.
 
Well, I'll welcome that news. The surge did ts job allowing for the orderly shift to Iraqi control that we've been working toward all this time.

I think it helped, but I think the Sunni Awakening did more to slow the fighting...but as a combo it really helped a lot. Problem with Afganistan is I am not sure there is a group to be the Awakening there , just the surge part will be there
 
I think it helped, but I think the Sunni Awakening did more to slow the fighting...but as a combo it really helped a lot. Problem with Afganistan is I am not sure there is a group to be the Awakening there , just the surge part will be there


Clearly the two complemented one another but I think the deal was struck with the surge guaranteeing the Iraqi side.

Two problem sin Afghanistan IMO. The central government is vastly weaker, so much so that even getting tribal leaders on board does not guarantee any sense of nationalism. Without that democracy and any true sense of freedom is simply not happening. The people have to want it for it to happen.
 
Pocket full of shells has it right for once.
Our Great military is kicking some serious ass. Lets get a real president, that will not waiver in a cowardess fashion and send in the required troops we need to finish this
" WAR " so that there will continue to be less American lives lost. No credit to Obama.
That is what you meant wasn`t it Shells. LOL

no cuz unlike you I am not a ........edited.......As much as Bush royaly screwed Up Iraq from day one, I supported the Surge and that in the end < while it took way way to long, he pulled his head out and did what was the right thing to to in Iraq....its to bad its the same thing I said before the war started even needed to be done if we went it....But at least he got there.

And Obama does not get much credit no, cuz he has not made major moves there...But he did Surge in Afghanistan and I fully support and hope for the same success even if I am less hopeful do to the Historic issues and Culture problems in Afghanistan...Unlike some I am not a party hack just out to Attack one side at any cost...
 
Werbung:
Clearly the two complemented one another but I think the deal was struck with the surge guaranteeing the Iraqi side.

Two problem sin Afghanistan IMO. The central government is vastly weaker, so much so that even getting tribal leaders on board does not guarantee any sense of nationalism. Without that democracy and any true sense of freedom is simply not happening. The people have to want it for it to happen.

the surge started well after the Awakening, it grew out of Al Quida misjudging the will of the people to put up with there killing.
 
Back
Top