Is anyone else concerned about

[Renegade]

Are you sure that you've ever led anybody in actual combat???

Where did I ever say I did?

 

[satx78247]

And just a few posts ago you said it was a sure thing they "won't be able to continue":

ONE thing is SURE: ISIS, after a few airstrikes, that wipe out their supply/troop convoys, training camps, HQ buildings & troop concentrations, won't be able to continue what they did & still are doing.

Now you have backtracked that to "evermore difficult/costly in men/money/time".

Renegade,

Once more (SIGH) you are grasping at straws = NOBODY on this forum is STUPID (including me) to believe even 1 percent of the absurd nonsense that you are trying to sell.

Anyone, who claims to be experienced in combat, would never even SUGGEST that EVERY asset can be destroyed. But such assets can be degraded to the point to make the assets militarily insignificant for anything above individual fighter/terrorist pairs/squad/platoon level actions.
(Can ANY force in any guerrilla war KILL ever fighter in any war?? )

LAUGHING AT YOU.

yours, satx

 

[satx78247]

Where did I ever say I did?

In other words, you have NOT??
(A simple YES or NO is the sole truthful answer to that question.)

yours, satx

 

[Renegade]

Renegade, ONE thing is SURE: ISIS, after a few airstrikes, that wipe out their supply/troop convoys, training camps, HQ buildings & troop concentrations, won't be able to continue what they did & still are doing.

^Says a few strikes will wipe out "supply/troop convoys, training camps, HQ buildings & troop concentrations" to the point ops can't continue then backtracks to:

Anyone, who claims to be experienced in combat, would never even SUGGEST that EVERY asset can be destroyed.

 

[Renegade]

In other words, you have NOT??
(A simple YES or NO is the sole truthful answer to that question.)

So you can't find where I said it, just like you can find the video of this so-called Convoy of troops.

 

[oldag]

 

[Kar98]

ILook at history of Russia, Germany, even Japan & China. All were tribal until WWI.

You can't possibly seriously believe that.

 

[toddnjoyce]

For all the folks saying 'airstrike' / 'drone strike'...if you knew how many dollars actually went into that, you'd crap your pants.

Given that it takes several hundred flight hours, several thousand man hours, and $115,000 per hellfire or $40K for jdam tailkit on a fighter that costs at least $11,000 per flight hour, you'd realize we easily top several million dollars just to tap a dude that we found today.

If we have to tap a dude like UBL, which took over a decade, a Tier 1 team, three SAP/SAR programs (at a minimum), I'd say we spent several billion dollars on that one hit alone.

Not a single military option is cheap to exercise.

 

[satx78247]

So you can't find where I said it, just like you can find the video of this so-called Convoy of troops.

Renegade,

Do you enjoy being laughed AT for making SILLY comments that wouldn't fool a 5YO??

Try being HONEST & FACTUAL for a change & you won't be ridiculed .

yours, satx

 

[BRD@66]

IBTL

 

[Renegade]

Renegade,

Do you enjoy being laughed AT for making SILLY comments that wouldn't fool a 5YO??

Try being HONEST & FACTUAL for a change & you won't be ridiculed .

yours, satx

Says the guy who :

1) Has no link for some convoy of thousands of ISIS fighters.

2) Has no link for claims I said I led men in combat.

3) Claims it is a SURE thing we can wipe out ISIS supply/troop convoys, training camps, HQ buildings & troop concentrations with a few airstrikes.

Cant wait to see what you have for #4. Getting more popcorn now.

 

[Kar98]

IBTL

Why? I'm seeing nothing but civilized and informed discussion. Of course I do have satx on ignore, maybe that helps?

 

[Younggun]

Renegade,

Do you enjoy being laughed AT for making SILLY comments that wouldn't fool a 5YO??

Try being HONEST & FACTUAL for a change & you won't be ridiculed .

yours, satx

You’ve been warned before about filling your posts with insults and have been temp banned for the same.


If you can’t discuss something without insulting those you disagree with you need to avoid these discussions.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[birddog]

One of several reasons why I typically avoid online discussions of politics and gov policy in general. And TV.

 

[busykngt]

I find the secret is in not trying to *convince* anybody to change their mind - generally, people are too entrenched in their own wrong opinions.

 

[karlac]

 

[satx78247]

You’ve been warned before about filling your posts with insults and have been temp banned for the same.


If you can’t discuss something without insulting those you disagree with you need to avoid these discussions.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Younggun,

Pardon me for asking when someone makes a DISHONEST, DECEPTIVE, intentionally MISLEADING or OBVIOUSLY FALSE post, is it OK to point that out OR should I just let them, unchallenged, continue posting NONSENSE, DECEPTIVENESS, FOOLISHNESS and/or outright FALSEHOODS??

In my opinion, IF a person does those things repeatedly that's NOT "insulting them", it's being HONEST about their false/misleading/non-responsive/SILLY posts.
(I find it "rather interesting" that you've repeatedly "called me down" in public, rather than privately, for the same thing that you say NOTHING to others, in public, for posting. - Do we have a "discrimination" or "personal dislike" problem here??)

When you banned me before, I didn't deserve the temporary banning then either, as what I said was TRUTHFUL, whether the TRUTH was pleasant to read or not.

One possibility for the "staff" is to NOT ever say anything to any forum members, except if obvious threats, libel, obscenities and/or vulgarity are used on the forum.
(As far as I know, we are mostly all "grownups". - I've not seen even one child on any forum.)

Btw, if a person has such a thin skin that they cannot stand FREE SPEECH and/or being disagreed with, perhaps they should not BE on Internet forums, lest their feelings get hurt.
(I didn't know that we had "snowflakes" on this forum.)
To paraphrase a former Justice of the SCOTUS: The remedy for speech that disturbs persons is more free speech.

MERRY CHRISTMAS to you/yours from both of us.

just my OPINIONS, satx

 

[HKShooter65]

Did Mattis quit today over the Syria withdrawal?

I trust Trump on taxes and economic domestic policy. I even agree with his wall.

On international relations, Nato, trade and military affairs I fear he is impulsive and inexperienced.

Mattis vehemently opposes the Syrian withdrawal.
The Russians are quite pleased that we are leaving.

Yes.
That should concern us all that a highly respect and profoundly experienced four star general thinks a grave error is being committed.

 

[HKShooter65]

I'm more concerned about ambiguous thread titles.

Web designers would call the titles "Click-Bait" intended to exploit our curiosity.
Ill suited for communication amongst friends.

 

[satx78247]

I trust Trump on taxes and economic domestic policy. I even agree with his wall.

On international relations, Nato, trade and military affairs I fear he is impulsive and inexperienced.

Mattis vehemently opposes the Syrian withdrawal.
The Russians are quite pleased that we are leaving.

Yes.
That should concern us all that a highly respect and profoundly experienced four star general thinks a grave error is being committed.

HKShooter65,

I would support our 2000+ USA/USN/Marines troops remaining IN Syria IF they were ALLOWED TO WIN. = The current "rules of engagement" are aimed at "containing" the ISIS terrorists, rather than UTTERLY DESTROYING that group of criminals as a coherent group that can mount concerted attacks on US forces, our allies and/or commit mass violence upon anyone else.
(YES, I understand that it would be virtually impossible to WIPE OUT every single terrorist in Syria but the remaining 20-25,000 ISIS terrorists, when they form into groups, operate motor vehicles and/or form supply convoys CAN be attacked from the air & made what the DoD calls: "militarily ineffective", i.e., UNABLE to do much more than individual or squad-sized attacks, anywhere.)

Note: GEN Mattis is "an expert" on military tactics but NOT the SOLE expert on terrorism in the USA. - Other flag officers have different opinions.

Btw, ANY policy that is opposed by MSNBC/CNN & the radical left wing of the DIMocRATS Party is at least "suspect" in my opinion.

just my OPINION, satx
USAMPR, Retired