Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

If insurgents hold on until Summer 2006: THEY WIN

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 10:44:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 10:47:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.

I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 5:53:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>
> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>
> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>

Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 

So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
wrong, you must apologize ... ;p

- n'a
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 5:53:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>
> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>
>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>
>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>
>
> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>
> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?

Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections, doesn't
it?

> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p

I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election cycle
for this one, either...
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 5:59:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>
> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>
>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>
>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
>>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>
>>
>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>
>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>
> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
> doesn't it?

Really? What does your psychic mind predict?

btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
"poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"? What
needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?

>
>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>
> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
> the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
> cycle for this one, either...
>

I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
for *any* potential presidential candidate.

- n'a
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 5:59:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:r4Dae.59107$vt1.26189@edtnps90...
>
> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>
>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>
>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>
>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>
>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>
>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>> doesn't it?
>
> Really? What does your psychic mind predict?
>
> btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
> "poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"?

Never been in the Guard OR the Infantry.

What
> needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?
>

I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm hearing
rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy" but
haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.

>>
>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>
>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
>> the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>> cycle for this one, either...
>>
>
> I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
> for *any* potential presidential candidate.

The presidential election isn't until 2008. We're talking the next
congressional cycle here.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:06:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:D 7Dae.17757$%c1.12740@fed1read05...
>
> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:r4Dae.59107$vt1.26189@edtnps90...
>>
>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>
>>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>>
>>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>>
>>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>>
>>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>> doesn't it?
>>
>> Really? What does your psychic mind predict?
>>
>> btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
>> "poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"?
>
> Never been in the Guard OR the Infantry.
>
> What
>> needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?
>>
>
> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm
> hearing rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy"
> but haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.

So, if the PT regimine is "too easy", that means that is the reason
that the U.S. is "losing" to the insurgency, according to the poster?


>
>>>
>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>
>>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is
>>> in the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>>> cycle for this one, either...
>>>
>>
>> I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
>> for *any* potential presidential candidate.
>
> The presidential election isn't until 2008. We're talking the next
> congressional cycle here.
>

I don't think it will happen. But, if I'm wrong, *I* will
apologize ... ;) 

- n'a
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:06:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:qaDae.59111$vt1.2048@edtnps90...
>
> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:D 7Dae.17757$%c1.12740@fed1read05...
>>
>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:r4Dae.59107$vt1.26189@edtnps90...
>>>
>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>>
>>>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>>>
>>>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts.
>>>>>>> Stop-loss
>>>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>>>
>>>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>>>
>>>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>>> doesn't it?
>>>
>>> Really? What does your psychic mind predict?
>>>
>>> btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
>>> "poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"?
>>
>> Never been in the Guard OR the Infantry.
>>
>> What
>>> needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?
>>>
>>
>> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
>> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm
>> hearing rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy"
>> but haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.
>
> So, if the PT regimine is "too easy", that means that is the reason
> that the U.S. is "losing" to the insurgency, according to the poster?
>

No idea. As far as I understand it, the "new regimine" is pretty much
brand-new, so it hasn't bee evaluated in the field until recently, if at
all...
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>>
>>>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is
>>>> in the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next
>>>> election cycle for this one, either...
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
>>> for *any* potential presidential candidate.
>>
>> The presidential election isn't until 2008. We're talking the next
>> congressional cycle here.
>>
>
> I don't think it will happen. But, if I'm wrong, *I* will
> apologize ... ;) 

Why? Why apologize for honest disagreement in a newsgroup argument?
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:06:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 02:06:14 GMT, "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com>
wrote:


>>
>> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
>> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm
>> hearing rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy"
>> but haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.
>
>So, if the PT regimine is "too easy", that means that is the reason
>that the U.S. is "losing" to the insurgency, according to the poster?

I wonder if he could come of with specific examples from Iraq to
support his conclusions?

In Iraq the only way to tell the difference between Active, Reserve
and Guard is to ask the soldier which component he or she is in.




"The commander in the field is always right and the
rear echelon is wrong, unless proved otherwise."
General Colin Powell
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:10:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:VcDae.17759$%c1.9575@fed1read05...
>
> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:qaDae.59111$vt1.2048@edtnps90...
>>
>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:D 7Dae.17757$%c1.12740@fed1read05...
>>>
>>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:r4Dae.59107$vt1.26189@edtnps90...
>>>>
>>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>>>
>>>>> "La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep
>>>>>>>> 100,000+
>>>>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts.
>>>>>>>> Stop-loss
>>>>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to
>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006.
>>>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>>>> doesn't it?
>>>>
>>>> Really? What does your psychic mind predict?
>>>>
>>>> btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
>>>> "poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"?
>>>
>>> Never been in the Guard OR the Infantry.
>>>
>>> What
>>>> needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
>>> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm
>>> hearing rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too
>>> easy" but haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.
>>
>> So, if the PT regimine is "too easy", that means that is the reason
>> that the U.S. is "losing" to the insurgency, according to the poster?
>>
>
> No idea. As far as I understand it, the "new regimine" is pretty much
> brand-new, so it hasn't bee evaluated in the field until recently, if at
> all...
>>

My daughter once considered joining the Canadian Military just
for the fitness aspect.

>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is
>>>>> in the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next
>>>>> election cycle for this one, either...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
>>>> for *any* potential presidential candidate.
>>>
>>> The presidential election isn't until 2008. We're talking the next
>>> congressional cycle here.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think it will happen. But, if I'm wrong, *I* will
>> apologize ... ;) 
>
> Why? Why apologize for honest disagreement in a newsgroup argument?
>

I'm jes' teasin' ... ;) 

For the same of debate, I sometimes like to play Devil's Advocate.
That's part of the fun.

- n'a
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:21:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 18:55:46 -0700, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>
>"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>
>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>
>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
>>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>
>>
>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>
>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>
>Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections, doesn't
>it?
>
>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>
>I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
>the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election cycle
>for this one, either...
>
You and your ilk have been warning of a draft since before the
2004 election. How long before you admit you're wrong?
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:21:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"jimpgh2002" <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ri0m61p76abee39q6d13krkv18ltu4lrap@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 18:55:46 -0700, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>
>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>
>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>> the
>>>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>
>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>
>>Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>doesn't
>>it?
>>
>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>
>>I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
>>the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>>cycle
>>for this one, either...
>>
> You and your ilk have been warning of a draft since before the
> 2004 election. How long before you admit you're wrong?

Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:21:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:


>
> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>
>
>

Some of my best friends are moose.
April 24, 2005 6:41:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"jimpgh2002" <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ri0m61p76abee39q6d13krkv18ltu4lrap@4ax.com...
: On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 18:55:46 -0700, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com>
: wrote:
:
: >
: >"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
: >news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
: >>
: >> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
: >> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
: >>>
: >>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
: >>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
: >>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
: >>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
: >>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
: >>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
: >>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
: >>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
: >>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
: >>>
: >>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
the
: >>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
: >>>
: >>
: >> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
: >>
: >> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
: >
: >Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
doesn't
: >it?
: >
: >> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
: >> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
: >
: >I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
: >the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
cycle
: >for this one, either...
: >
: You and your ilk have been warning of a draft since before the
: 2004 election. How long before you admit you're wrong?

There was talk of a draft, into the National Guard, back during the Clinton
era.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:47:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 23 Apr 2005 18:44:05 -0700, alexcain@mailinator.com (Alex Cain)
wrote:

>The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.


Wishful thinking, Alex?


---*
BitHead's Place: Political commentary from the REAL world.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bitheads
Also available at:
http://www.rightpoint.org/

Before you preach tolerance, THINK
Those who tolerate *everything*, stand for *nothing*
What do YOU stand for?
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:12:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>
>"jimpgh2002" <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ri0m61p76abee39q6d13krkv18ltu4lrap@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 18:55:46 -0700, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:I_Cae.59105$vt1.44226@edtnps90...
>>>>
>>>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>>>>>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>>>>>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>>>>>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>>>>>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>>>>>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>>>>>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>>>>>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>>> the
>>>>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>>
>>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>>
>>>Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>>doesn't
>>>it?
>>>
>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>
>>>I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
>>>the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>>>cycle
>>>for this one, either...
>>>
>> You and your ilk have been warning of a draft since before the
>> 2004 election. How long before you admit you're wrong?
>
>Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>

Okay, then you're just wrong.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:22:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-84237D.23204123042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Some of my best friends are moose.

And you're a deer .....
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:22:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7iEae.59563$vt1.30225@edtnps90...
>
> "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
> news:hcb-84237D.23204123042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>> In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
>> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Some of my best friends are moose.
>
> And you're a deer .....
>

You're both wrong, and that's that.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 11:47:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 23 Apr 2005 18:44:05 -0700, alexcain@mailinator.com (Alex Cain)
wrote:

>The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.


You seem to have over looked the US Armed Forces in the Pacific;
Korea, Japan, Okinawa, Guam, and a few other locations that you don't
need to know about that are ready, willing and certainly able to fight
when called on.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:35:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Uhm, I dunno where you are getting your info, but US troops are not
poorly trained. If they are, then why did the insurgents stop attacking us
in favor of civilian targets?

Could you please stop trolling US.Military.Army? Your lack of knowledge
of military affairs is embarassing.

V-Man
(Posted and Mailed to ensure delivery.)

"Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:38:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>>
>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
>>> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>
>>
>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>
>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>
> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
> doesn't it?

Since the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence the
events of the last election, why should the next one be different? The only
influence re: elections was the drop in support for the insurgents after the
Iraqi elections.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but you *might* want to pull your
head out of your fourth point of contact.

V-Man
>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>
> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
> the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
> cycle for this one, either...
>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:38:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Velovich" <velovich@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:kOJae.4$Jp5.2@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>
>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>
>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>> doesn't it?
>
> Since the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence the
> events of the last election, why should the next one be different? The
> only influence re: elections was the drop in support for the insurgents
> after the Iraqi elections.

You mean the outcome of the last USA election? The one where a sitting "war"
president barely was re-elected, and is now at the lowest level of
popularity of any second-term president in a very long time?

Nya, the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence the
events of the last election one bit...

>
> I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but you *might* want to pull
> your head out of your fourth point of contact.
>
> V-Man
>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>
>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is in
>> the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>> cycle for this one, either...
>>
>
>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:39:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:D 7Dae.17757$%c1.12740@fed1read05...
>> btw, do you agree with the poster that the Infantry and Guard are
>> "poorly trained" ? If so, how are they "poorly trained"?
>
> Never been in the Guard OR the Infantry.

And yet you agreed with his prediction of bad times to come. What do you
base your agreement on if your response to the training question La N posed
is "I've enver been..."?

V-Man


> What
>> needs to happen for them to be "better trained"?
>>
>
> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm
> hearing rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy"
> but haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.
>
>>>
>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>
>>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is
>>> in the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>>> cycle for this one, either...
>>>
>>
>> I would venture to say that calling for a draft would be disastrous
>> for *any* potential presidential candidate.
>
> The presidential election isn't until 2008. We're talking the next
> congressional cycle here.
>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:46:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The collapse of the dollar, and thus US power, might not take that long.



--

Rick (Richard Allen) Hohensee
write-in candidate, President of the United States of America
platform ftp://linux01.gwdg.de/pub/cLIeNUX/interim/platform2
personal webpage http://linux01.gwdg.de/~rhohen
active in Usenet alt.politics colorg on IRC
humbubba@smart.net Maryland, USA
Ground troops out of Iraq Put the CIA under INS Save Darfur
Semi-legalize drugs Prosecute Bush Tighten the borders
Isolate Israel Tax churches halve military aquisitions
government jobs for Iraq-wounded soldiers and 9-11 survivors
please email my platform to friends, blogs and countrymen
-------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 1:52:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

humbubba@smart.net
>
>The collapse of the dollar, and thus US power, might not take that long.
>

Interesting question: which props up which, US fiat money or US military
power? I'm guessing they are co-dependant.


>
>
>--
>
>Rick (Richard Allen) Hohensee
>write-in candidate, President of the United States of America
>platform ftp://linux01.gwdg.de/pub/cLIeNUX/interim/platform2
>personal webpage http://linux01.gwdg.de/~rhohen
>active in Usenet alt.politics colorg on IRC
>humbubba@smart.net Maryland, USA
>Ground troops out of Iraq Put the CIA under INS Save Darfur
>Semi-legalize drugs Prosecute Bush Tighten the borders
>Isolate Israel Tax churches halve military aquisitions
>government jobs for Iraq-wounded soldiers and 9-11 survivors
>please email my platform to friends, blogs and countrymen
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:29:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 09:38:24 GMT, Velovich <velovich@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Since the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence
> the
> events of the last election, why should the next one be different? The
> only
> influence re: elections was the drop in support for the insurgents after
> the
> Iraqi elections.

I wonder what evidence do you have of that "drop in support for the
insurgents".

Anyway, I believe you are correct when you state the insurgency (and
resistance) is not related, at least in a strong way, with the outcoming
of teh last election, and I dare to say, the political proccess going on
in Iraq.
But it works both ways, and probably some important figures now commanding
insurgent, resistant and terrorist attacks don't care much about who is on
the Government, as they probably have a different plan.
Baath on the past has had a strategy of going underground when they are
weak, making everything possible to disrupt the country and then, when
anarchy is rampant, they stage a coup and appear as the great saviours of
Iraq.
I don't know how much of the attacks we see on Iraq are Baath on origin,
but I would say that at least a fair part of them probably are, if we are
to rely on the Mafkarat al Islam reports (main source of the Iraqi
Resistance Reports).
And here I don't mean Saddam's Baath, nor those "old regime" idiocies.
Saddam is history now, and everyone has moved forward, including his Party.


--
"Humanity has many enemies. The worst of them are ignorance, arrogance,
extremism, and violence" - Abbas Kadhim
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:29:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Paulo Gomes Jardim" <darwin+usenet@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:o pspqqi8b6urn6af@paulo...
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 09:38:24 GMT, Velovich <velovich@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Since the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence
>> the
>> events of the last election, why should the next one be different? The
>> only
>> influence re: elections was the drop in support for the insurgents after
>> the
>> Iraqi elections.
>
> I wonder what evidence do you have of that "drop in support for the
> insurgents".

Look at the news. Look at all the reports of Iraqi security forces doing
thier job. They don't just go out on the street and magically know that that
building over there has insurgents in it. They are getting intel from the
populace, they are enjoying greater support. This is how *you* can see
what's going on. I have confirmation from people that are either there *now*
or have come back in the last two months.

>
> Anyway, I believe you are correct when you state the insurgency (and
> resistance) is not related, at least in a strong way, with the outcoming
> of teh last election, and I dare to say, the political proccess going on
> in Iraq.
> But it works both ways, and probably some important figures now commanding
> insurgent, resistant and terrorist attacks don't care much about who is on
> the Government, as they probably have a different plan.

They alwasy have - "nobody but us in power."

> Baath on the past has had a strategy of going underground when they are
> weak, making everything possible to disrupt the country and then, when
> anarchy is rampant, they stage a coup and appear as the great saviours of
> Iraq.

And they are completely out of favor due to the excesses of the party and
Saddam's regieme. Their only supporters are their own people. They have lots
the battle for the rest of the populace, who would sooner die than go back
to what they offer.

> I don't know how much of the attacks we see on Iraq are Baath on origin,
> but I would say that at least a fair part of them probably are, if we are
> to rely on the Mafkarat al Islam reports (main source of the Iraqi
> Resistance Reports).
> And here I don't mean Saddam's Baath, nor those "old regime" idiocies.
> Saddam is history now, and everyone has moved forward, including his
> Party.

But they are still tainted by two things - association w/ Saddam and
their own ecesses under his regieme. Further, thier support came from the
Sunni minority, which is truly out of favor, again, due to past party
activities. The Baath party would have to speak out against, and act
against, Sunnis that were given confiscated Shi'ia property. That would
alienate the support base for the Baath party. They are in a catch 22 which
is why they are attacking the infrastructure (that and their inability to
face Allied forces and get decent results).

>
>
> --
> "Humanity has many enemies. The worst of them are ignorance, arrogance,
> extremism, and violence" - Abbas Kadhim
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:31:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:tNLae.17813$%c1.17113@fed1read05...
>
> "Velovich" <velovich@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:kOJae.4$Jp5.2@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:z0Dae.17754$%c1.3980@fed1read05...
>>>>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in
>>>>> the ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, I'm waiting to see people start placing their bets ... ;) 
>>>>
>>>> So, Lawson, what policy do you think will change "drastically"?
>>>
>>> Not sure. It all depends on the situation just before the elections,
>>> doesn't it?
>>
>> Since the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence
>> the events of the last election, why should the next one be different?
>> The only influence re: elections was the drop in support for the
>> insurgents after the Iraqi elections.
>
> You mean the outcome of the last USA election? The one where a sitting
> "war" president barely was re-elected, and is now at the lowest level of
> popularity of any second-term president in a very long time?

A) He was reelected nonetheless. If he only won by a fraction of a
percent, he still *won*.
B) Every president goes through ups and downs. This time last year, Bush
had terrible ratings and THAT was during an election year. Ignore the polls,
they are so over-used and manipulated, today, as to be useless.

>
> Nya, the tactical and operational situation in Iraq didn't influence the
> events of the last election one bit...

Waiting for proof of your assertion, which is woefully lacking.

>
>>
>> I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but you *might* want to pull
>> your head out of your fourth point of contact.
>>
>> V-Man
>>>> I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, if you are
>>>> wrong, you must apologize ... ;p
>>>
>>> I haven't apologized for suggesting that a new draft *of some kind* is
>>> in the pipeline, so don't hold your breath until after the next election
>>> cycle for this one, either...
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:32:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Since you can't tell, you are definately not a valid candidate for
President. You'd be a disaster. Go away.

"cLIeNUX user" <r@cLIeNUX.> wrote in message
news:116mr3027elfc5d@corp.supernews.com...
> humbubba@smart.net
>>
>>The collapse of the dollar, and thus US power, might not take that long.
>>
>
> Interesting question: which props up which, US fiat money or US military
> power? I'm guessing they are co-dependant.
>
>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>Rick (Richard Allen) Hohensee
>>write-in candidate, President of the United States of America
>>platform ftp://linux01.gwdg.de/pub/cLIeNUX/interim/platform2
>>personal webpage http://linux01.gwdg.de/~rhohen
>>active in Usenet alt.politics colorg on IRC
>>humbubba@smart.net Maryland, USA
>>Ground troops out of Iraq Put the CIA under INS Save Darfur
>>Semi-legalize drugs Prosecute Bush Tighten the borders
>>Isolate Israel Tax churches halve military aquisitions
>>government jobs for Iraq-wounded soldiers and 9-11 survivors
>>please email my platform to friends, blogs and countrymen
>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 9:21:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 15:29:13 GMT, Velovich <velovich@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>
> "Paulo Gomes Jardim" <darwin+usenet@spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:o pspqqi8b6urn6af@paulo...

[..]
>> I wonder what evidence do you have of that "drop in support for the
>> insurgents".
>
> Look at the news. Look at all the reports of Iraqi security forces
> doing
> thier job. They don't just go out on the street and magically know that
> that
> building over there has insurgents in it. They are getting intel from the
> populace, they are enjoying greater support. This is how *you* can see
> what's going on. I have confirmation from people that are either there
> *now*
> or have come back in the last two months.

They are getting intel from the populace since April 2003, but no
significant results could be seen, at least apparently.

Some of the Iraqi Security forces probably aren't that bad. I do believe
there are some competent guys there too. However, among those you have the
sectarian Badr and Peshmeerga militias, among others of the same kind.
You also have many insurgent/resistant/terrorist assets, as was recently
evident from the words of the Governor of Mosul. He said he didn't had any
confidence on any of the 18.000 policemen working on the Nineveh district.
Adding to this there has been a stream of sound complaints from civilian
authorities about the shameful behaviour of the INF, things like forcing
doctors to neglect other patients in order to treat their injured, beating
and humilliating doctors and patients in hospitals when they refuse to
give them such a previleged status, etc.

In any case, the most evident proof that things remain the same in Iraq,
if not worst, is the never ending parade of journalists, university
professors, wealthy people, Government workers and so being killed and
kidnapped every day. Iraq has recently been deemed the most dangerous
country in the world by a recent survey:
"Iraq is by far the most dangerous country to do business"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4457705.stm

I guess you can always say that, since today there was only one person
killed, and yesterday there were 10, the situation is improving, but that
is just meanigless barbershop talk.

[..]
>> Baath on the past has had a strategy of going underground when they are
>> weak, making everything possible to disrupt the country and then, when
>> anarchy is rampant, they stage a coup and appear as the great saviours
>> of
>> Iraq.
>
> And they are completely out of favor due to the excesses of the party
> and
> Saddam's regieme. Their only supporters are their own people. They have
> lots
> the battle for the rest of the populace, who would sooner die than go
> back
> to what they offer.

You are probably right. However Baath was never a popular Party in Iraq,
and they didn't had much popular support when they staged the other 2
coups, suceeding on the last one.

>> I don't know how much of the attacks we see on Iraq are Baath on origin,
>> but I would say that at least a fair part of them probably are, if we
>> are
>> to rely on the Mafkarat al Islam reports (main source of the Iraqi
>> Resistance Reports).
>> And here I don't mean Saddam's Baath, nor those "old regime" idiocies.
>> Saddam is history now, and everyone has moved forward, including his
>> Party.
>
> But they are still tainted by two things - association w/ Saddam and
> their own ecesses under his regieme.

Nothing that a little name changing could not correct. ;) 

> Further, thier support came from the
> Sunni minority, which is truly out of favor, again, due to past party
> activities.

Not necessarly. The Baath is intersectarian.
In Syria, for instance, they are mainly Shia.
I don't hesitate to say that people like Allawi, a Shia, are much more
closer to Baathist ideals than the Sunni "Association of the Muslim
Scholars" which represents a large number of Sunni.
The same with the Kurds. I don't doubt that some Kurdish Party leaders are
too much ready to temporarly associate with anyone who would support their
agenda, even if it is Baath.

> The Baath party would have to speak out against, and act
> against, Sunnis that were given confiscated Shi'ia property. That would
> alienate the support base for the Baath party. They are in a catch 22
> which
> is why they are attacking the infrastructure (that and their inability to
> face Allied forces and get decent results).

The US forces now seem to be largely confined to their military bases, so
they are not too much of a target.

The base strategy, I guess, is keep disrupting every Government effort to
restore the country to normality until the situation favours a more direct
approach.
This could take some time, but the Baath can wait, as they have waited in
the past.


--
"Humanity has many enemies. The worst of them are ignorance, arrogance,
extremism, and violence" - Abbas Kadhim
April 24, 2005 9:46:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
: The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
: troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
: orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
: units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
: out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
: is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
: the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.

What do you mean by "poorly trained"? By the standards of Vietnam era,
these troops tend to be trained to a level that you could not imagine. Ever
heard of JRTC at Ft Polk? Or NTC in California? Not only combat situations
but a lot of training in how to deal with civilians on the battlefield.

While the Infantry are more cutting edge as a combat force, you forget that
we have a lot of folks whose primary function is to deal with civilians.
Like the Civil Affairs folks (it is a career field, a series of MOSs). Even
the Military Police have a huge amount of training in dealing with civilians
on the battlefield. And a good portion of our MPs are in the reserves, all
of the CA battalions are in the USAR.

The Army and the Marines continue to train for urban warfare. More and more
of the training at places like JRTC is focused on urban conflict rather than
traditional open terrain warfare. You need to go to places like Ft Bragg or
to a CA battalion and ask those folks to explain to you how they are
trained. You might be surprised on how well these folks are trained, far
better than any military in history. In many ways, better than many of the
smaller US police departments.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:35:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <D7Dae.17757$%c1.12740@fed1read05>,
on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:03:16 -0700,
LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....

>
>
> I would guess that for the Guard, there needs to be more "hands on"
> preparation before deployment, as well as better PT year-round. I'm hearing
> rumors that the new Army physical training regimine is "too easy" but
> haven't seen anything from a non-biased source.

There is no "new" PT regimen
One is(was) under study but has not been implimented.


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:38:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....

>
> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>

Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:38:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>
>>
>> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>>
>
> Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.

Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:39:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <tNLae.17813$%c1.17113@fed1read05>,
on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:55:01 -0700,
LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....

>
> You mean the outcome of the last USA election? The one where a sitting "war"
> president barely was re-elected, and is now at the lowest level of
> popularity of any second-term president in a very long time?
>

You mean re-elected with a wider margine than his first one ?




--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:39:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cd614358650329c98b910@news.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <tNLae.17813$%c1.17113@fed1read05>,
> on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:55:01 -0700,
> LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>
>>
>> You mean the outcome of the last USA election? The one where a sitting
>> "war"
>> president barely was re-elected, and is now at the lowest level of
>> popularity of any second-term president in a very long time?
>>
>
> You mean re-elected with a wider margine than his first one ?

Seeing how his popular vote got him elected with a *negative* margin, that's
not hard to do...

And, [Ping Howard too], what's your take on the advisability of using
electronic voting machines with no paper trail? The Democrats objected to
that one before the election, as did quite a few experts. They still do.

Compare the accuracy of polling in predicting the outcome of the election in
states that provided equipment with paper trails as compared to the accuracy
of polling in predicting the outcome of the election in states that did not.
Now compare the recentness of redness and the blueness of the states with
no-paper-trail equipment. Get as paranoid as you like and make a comparison
between scenarios based on how easy it would have been to manipulate
elections in the red states vs the blue states, correlated with the
equipment issue.
April 26, 2005 1:17:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:BTCae.17751$%c1.446@fed1read05...
>
> "Alex Cain" <alexcain@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:6a28e304.0504231744.37b6e98@posting.google.com...
>> The US military can't sustain current troop levels and keep 100,000+
>> troops in Iraq past mid 2006 according to defense analysts. Stop-loss
>> orders won't cut it and recruiting is way down especially for Guard
>> units. It's a safe bet that the Sunni and Al Qaeda rebels won't run
>> out of explosives and arms for a very long time. All they need to do
>> is bleed the poorly trained US infantry/guard units until 2006. Even
>> the Vietcong didn't have it that easy that fast.
>
> I wouldn't call Al Qaeda folk "rebels," but I suspect that you're in the
> ballpark for when things change drastically, policy-wise.
>
If we pull our ground troops before the insurgents are defeated,
it will be so we can do alot more of this:
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2005/april/ogrish-dot-co...
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 9:48:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....

>
> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >
> >>
> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
> >>
> >
> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>
> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...

Figureed as much

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 9:48:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
> on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
> LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>
>>
>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>>
>> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>
> Figureed as much
>

However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 3:22:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >
> >>
> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
> >>
> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
> >
> > Figureed as much
> >
>
> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
>
>

MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
ilk and llamas.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 7:35:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>> >>
>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>> >
>> > Figureed as much
>> >
>>
>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
>>
>>
>
> MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
> diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
> ilk and llamas.

The thing about ilk is that they have this wacky sense of being
conspired against ....>%^)

We deers think that's pretty funny.

- n'a
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 9:20:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>> >>
>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>> >
>> > Figureed as much
>> >
>>
>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
>>
>>
>
> MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
> diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
> ilk and llamas.
A llama bit my sister once.....
--
Paul H. Lemmen
"...our best still don battle dress
and lay their lives on the line..."
from 'A Pittance of Time' by Terry Kelly
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 10:44:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>> >>
>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>> >
>> > Figureed as much
>> >
>>
>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
>>
>>
>
> MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
> diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
> ilk and llamas.

Hey, some call me Fred.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 11:20:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In <hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net>, Howard Berkowitz
<hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote:

>In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
><nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....

>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>> >>
>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>> >
>> > Figureed as much
>> >
>>
>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.

>
>MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
>diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
>ilk and llamas.

That's gnus to me ...
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 2:48:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Paul H. Lemmen" wrote:
>
> "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message

(mercy snipage occurs)

> > MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
> > diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
> > ilk and llamas.
> A llama bit my sister once.....


did he leave a hickey?

redc1c4,
popping smoke and moving out smartly..... %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 2:48:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"redc1c4" <redc1c4@drunkenbastards.org.ies> wrote in message
news:426EC570.DCF1F214@drunkenbastards.org.ies...
> "Paul H. Lemmen" wrote:
>>
>> "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
>
> (mercy snipage occurs)
>
>> > MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag
>> > operation,
>> > diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
>> > ilk and llamas.
>> A llama bit my sister once.....
>
>
> did he leave a hickey?

Wrong movie titles.
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 4:06:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"AUK Registrar" <cjiii@mxyzptlk.net> wrote in message
news:r4jt619nmpgrtr4cdqtm5iukgbdlftia7b@4ax.com...
> In <hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net>, Howard Berkowitz
> <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
>><nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
>>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
>>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
>>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
>>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
>>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
>>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
>
>>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
>>> >>
>>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
>>> >
>>> > Figureed as much
>>> >
>>>
>>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of humor.
>
>>
>>MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag operation,
>>diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
>>ilk and llamas.
>
> That's gnus to me ...
>

Ahhh ... Wa'piti ....
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 4:07:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <DIAbe.2173$vN2.992@clgrps13>, "La N"
<nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "AUK Registrar" <cjiii@mxyzptlk.net> wrote in message
> news:r4jt619nmpgrtr4cdqtm5iukgbdlftia7b@4ax.com...
> > In <hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net>, Howard Berkowitz
> > <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote:
> >
> >>In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> >><nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >>> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >>> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
> >>> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
> >>> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >>> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >>> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >>> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> >>> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> >>> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >
> >>> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are wrong.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
> >>> >
> >>> > Figureed as much
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of
> >>> humor.
> >
> >>
> >>MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag
> >>operation,
> >>diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general admiration of
> >>ilk and llamas.
> >
> > That's gnus to me ...
> >
>
> Ahhh ... Wa'piti ....
>
>

Hippety hoppity.
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 7:59:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

LawsonE wrote:
> "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
> news:hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> > In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> > <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
> >> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> >> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> >> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are
wrong.
> >> >>
> >> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
> >> >
> >> > Figureed as much
> >> >
> >>
> >> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of
humor.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag
operation,
> > diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general
admiration of
> > ilk and llamas.
>
> Hey, some call me Fred.

"They call me Tater Salad"
--
Paul H. Lemmen
(of course, the llama bite was after a Møøse bit my other
sister....you know, Møøse bites can be Nastï....)
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 7:59:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.military,us.military.army,alt.politics,soc.culture.iraq,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

LawsonE wrote:
> "Howard Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
> news:hcb-A61FDE.11221626042005@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> > In article <VYlbe.19572$%c1.7589@fed1read05>, "LawsonE"
> > <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.1cd775e3308c860f98b916@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >> > In article <Bj%ae.18178$%c1.453@fed1read05>,
> >> > on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 22:35:06 -0700,
> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> "Tank Fixer" <paul.deekat.carrier@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> >> >> news:MPG.1cd613f4b4c8efa298b90f@news.west.earthlink.net...
> >> >> > In article <3uDae.17765$%c1.1458@fed1read05>,
> >> >> > on Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:27:17 -0700,
> >> >> > LawsonE nospam@nospam.com attempted to say .....
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Me and my ilk never admit we're wrong.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Too bad you con't have the honesty to admit when you are
wrong.
> >> >>
> >> >> Me and my ilk are excruciatingly dishonest, too...
> >> >
> >> > Figureed as much
> >> >
> >>
> >> However, unlike some, me and the rest of the ilks have a sense of
humor.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > MOOSE have a sense of humor. You ilk are running a false-flag
operation,
> > diverting attention from moose and exploiting the general
admiration of
> > ilk and llamas.
>
> Hey, some call me Fred.

"They call me Tater Salad"
--
Paul H. Lemmen
(of course, the llama bite was after a Møøse bit my other
sister....you know, Møøse bites can be Nastï....)
!