US 'troop boost in Iraq likely

[Caladan 19]

Of course, the WWII nuclear analogy makes very little sense. Hiroshima & Nagasaki brought about the surrender of the Japanese government; Hussein's been out of power for some time in Iraq.

Nuking something now would be deranged. Which city should it be? Which city do we nuke to solve the problem of the insurgency? No suggestions? Thought so.

What you might mean is the Marshall Plan, which is credited with preventing the rise of another German or Japanese military expansion. But the thing about the Marshall Plan is that it didn't involve nuking anything. Of course, the Marshall Plan could only be implemented once the war was won, and there's no insurgency equivalent..... so instead of vaguely waving the flag and saying we should do it just like WWII, how about we concede that they're very different wars and then maybe move onto solutions that could possibly apply to the situation at hand.

[sharky 2]

oh yeah..right...keep forgetting to listen to all of you who love to tell me that things are over my head.

i was referencing the mayor in 1945. i doubt you met that one. der..........

Charles, Keep it simple!

Talking of SIMPLE once again, nice pics on your signature CarolsMarc, I especially like how they are so tiny and insignificant. You really have to look for them when we look at your posts. I'm not offended at all by them, especially the one of you giving the finger to everyone....

It really makes me want to try and have an intellectual debate with you when I look at those............

very cerebral paulc

wow Charles, cerebral.......... you been on wikipedia.com again????

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

oh yeah..right...keep forgetting to listen to all of you who love to tell me that things are over my head.

i was referencing the mayor in 1945. i doubt you met that one. der..........

Charles, Keep it simple!

Talking of SIMPLE once again, nice pics on your signature CarolsMarc, I especially like how they are so tiny and insignificant. You really have to look for them when we look at your posts. I'm not offended at all by them, especially the one of you giving the finger to everyone....

It really makes me want to try and have an intellectual debate with you when I look at those............

very cerebral paulc

wow Charles, cerebral.......... you been on wikipedia.com again????

again, it went over your head

Of course, the WWII nuclear analogy makes very little sense. Hiroshima & Nagasaki brought about the surrender of the Japanese government; Hussein's been out of power for some time in Iraq.

Nuking something now would be deranged. Which city should it be? Which city do we nuke to solve the problem of the insurgency? No suggestions? Thought so.

What you might mean is the Marshall Plan, which is credited with preventing the rise of another German or Japanese military expansion. But the thing about the Marshall Plan is that it didn't involve nuking anything. Of course, the Marshall Plan could only be implemented once the war was won, and there's no insurgency equivalent..... so instead of vaguely waving the flag and saying we should do it just like WWII, how about we concede that they're very different wars and then maybe move onto solutions that could possibly apply to the situation at hand.

no one was suggesting nuking iraq. the nuclear analagy was specific to the last line of her statement

There are two arguments happening simutaneously. One is how to win the war militarily and the other is how to resolve the war politically. I don;t think you can have both. Politics will trump military victory

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

oh yeah..right...keep forgetting to listen to all of you who love to tell me that things are over my head.

i was referencing the mayor in 1945. i doubt you met that one. der..........

Charles, Keep it simple!

Talking of SIMPLE once again, nice pics on your signature CarolsMarc, I especially like how they are so tiny and insignificant. You really have to look for them when we look at your posts. I'm not offended at all by them, especially the one of you giving the finger to everyone....

It really makes me want to try and have an intellectual debate with you when I look at those............

Pictures are pictures, if you want to associate one of them to you? not my problem. Your sensitivity towards a symbol ? Thats your issue. The finger pic. is my way of showing my philosophy on life. I am not here for freindship or approval as so many here are. Oh one more thing I am not making you want to do anything!

Edited December 20, 2006 by CarolsMarc

[sharky 2]

oh yeah..right...keep forgetting to listen to all of you who love to tell me that things are over my head.

i was referencing the mayor in 1945. i doubt you met that one. der..........

Charles, Keep it simple!

Talking of SIMPLE once again, nice pics on your signature CarolsMarc, I especially like how they are so tiny and insignificant. You really have to look for them when we look at your posts. I'm not offended at all by them, especially the one of you giving the finger to everyone....

It really makes me want to try and have an intellectual debate with you when I look at those............

Pictures are pictures, if you want to associate one of them to you? not my problem. Your sensitivity towards a symbol ? Thats your issue. The finger pic. is my way of showing my philosophy on life. I am not here for freindship or approval as so many here are.

so basically your saying your philosophy on life is "if you don't like it, f#ck all of you".............. mmmmm nice

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

[Caladan 19]

But that's the point, charles.

Military might didn't win the aftermath of WWII; rebuilding, investment, and having a plan did. In other words, politics and economics did. What we don't have here is a plan for fixing Iraq, and just boosting troop counts in absence of a plan isn't going to help win the aftermath any more than nuking Kyoto would have.

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

i consider us not being on the same mental level a good thing. if you read and thought some you might catch something. and i'll pass on having a lobotomy to be on your level

But that's the point, charles.

Military might didn't win the aftermath of WWII; rebuilding, investment, and having a plan did. In other words, politics and economics did. What we don't have here is a plan for fixing Iraq, and just boosting troop counts in absence of a plan isn't going to help win the aftermath any more than nuking Kyoto would have.

so rebuilding, investment, and having a plan got the japanese to sign the documents on the missouri. i never knew that.

[sharky 2]

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

i consider us not being on the same mental level a good thing. if you read and thought some you might catch something. and i'll pass on having a lobotomy to be on your level

But that's the point, charles.

Military might didn't win the aftermath of WWII; rebuilding, investment, and having a plan did. In other words, politics and economics did. What we don't have here is a plan for fixing Iraq, and just boosting troop counts in absence of a plan isn't going to help win the aftermath any more than nuking Kyoto would have.

so rebuilding, investment, and having a plan got the japanese to sign the documents on the missouri. i never knew that.

sorry did someone say something???

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

i consider us not being on the same mental level a good thing. if you read and thought some you might catch something. and i'll pass on having a lobotomy to be on your level

But that's the point, charles.

Military might didn't win the aftermath of WWII; rebuilding, investment, and having a plan did. In other words, politics and economics did. What we don't have here is a plan for fixing Iraq, and just boosting troop counts in absence of a plan isn't going to help win the aftermath any more than nuking Kyoto would have.

so rebuilding, investment, and having a plan got the japanese to sign the documents on the missouri. i never knew that.

sorry did someone say something???

i expect nothing better from you

[mybackpages 0]

oh yeah..right...keep forgetting to listen to all of you who love to tell me that things are over my head.

i was referencing the mayor in 1945. i doubt you met that one. der..........

Charles, Keep it simple!

Talking of SIMPLE once again, nice pics on your signature CarolsMarc, I especially like how they are so tiny and insignificant. You really have to look for them when we look at your posts. I'm not offended at all by them, especially the one of you giving the finger to everyone....

It really makes me want to try and have an intellectual debate with you when I look at those............

very cerebral paulc

wow Charles, cerebral.......... you been on wikipedia.com again????

again, it went over your head

Of course, the WWII nuclear analogy makes very little sense. Hiroshima & Nagasaki brought about the surrender of the Japanese government; Hussein's been out of power for some time in Iraq.

Nuking something now would be deranged. Which city should it be? Which city do we nuke to solve the problem of the insurgency? No suggestions? Thought so.

What you might mean is the Marshall Plan, which is credited with preventing the rise of another German or Japanese military expansion. But the thing about the Marshall Plan is that it didn't involve nuking anything. Of course, the Marshall Plan could only be implemented once the war was won, and there's no insurgency equivalent..... so instead of vaguely waving the flag and saying we should do it just like WWII, how about we concede that they're very different wars and then maybe move onto solutions that could possibly apply to the situation at hand.

no one was suggesting nuking iraq. the nuclear analagy was specific to the last line of her statement

There are two arguments happening simutaneously. One is how to win the war militarily and the other is how to resolve the war politically. I don;t think you can have both. Politics will trump military victory

Okay I'm going to try again, but I am sure my own statement will be againover my head.

Politics will trup military objectives everytime. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were political decisions.

sorry did someone say something???

Nope, heard some jibberish, but nothing was said.

[Caladan 19]

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

i consider us not being on the same mental level a good thing. if you read and thought some you might catch something. and i'll pass on having a lobotomy to be on your level

But that's the point, charles.

Military might didn't win the aftermath of WWII; rebuilding, investment, and having a plan did. In other words, politics and economics did. What we don't have here is a plan for fixing Iraq, and just boosting troop counts in absence of a plan isn't going to help win the aftermath any more than nuking Kyoto would have.

so rebuilding, investment, and having a plan got the japanese to sign the documents on the missouri. i never knew that.

sorry did someone say something???

i expect nothing better from you

I know you're being deliberately obtuse for fun, but come on. Military might got the Japanese to surrender. No one's denying that.

However, military might didn't turn Japan into the first-world, prosperous ally we have today.

Beyond that, the analogy breaks down. Military might got Hussein out of power. It isn't winning against the insurgency, it's not clear that 25,000 exhausted troops will do any thing good, and we *still* don't have an exit strategy or a rebuilding plan.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

so basically your saying your philosophy on life is "if you don't like it, f#ck all of you".............. mmmmm nice

oh and Charles I'm sorry that we are not on the same intellectual level as you, as it seems that everything you're saying today is going over peoples heads..........

maybe you should start communicating with some higher forms of being on a different astral plane????

or as another option you can keep talking out of your #######....... and keep claiming that your verbal diarohea is going over people's heads when no-one is really listening to you anyway.......

There you go again,giving your intellectual negative comments on my philosophy of life. We all can tell your gettin pissed off Sharky. And as far as you being a self proclaimed intellectual, You might want to reevaluate! Im sorry if I hurt your feelings. Please dont be mad, I just want to be your freind. Have you ever heard the word "waterhead"

Edited December 20, 2006 by CarolsMarc

[mawilson 2,133]

very cerebral paulc

wow Charles, cerebral.......... you been on wikipedia.com again????

Ooh how very clever Charles. Cerebral palsy / cerebral PaulC -- get it?

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

very cerebral paulc

wow Charles, cerebral.......... you been on wikipedia.com again????

Ooh how very clever Charles. Cerebral palsy / cerebral PaulC -- get it?

yet the resident rocket scientist missed it

Edited December 20, 2006 by charlesandnessa

[garya505 2]

Politics will trup military objectives everytime. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were political decisions.

Not really political, just military and strategic. If the nukes hadn't been used the war would have continued for much longer and probably killed many more, both Japanese and Amercan. How many lives were lost in the battle for Okinawa, something like 260000? The nukes brought the war to an end pronto. The Japanese would never have surrendered otherwise.