+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa (/showthread.php?tid=125299)
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - Mac1337 - 10-16-2011
Listen to a Ghandi disciple trying to sound like Rambo. It ain't working, tandori.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - john dough - 10-16-2011
For all the talk of war, why haven't you enlisted yet, chickenhawk?
Have you ever had skin in the game (as in relatives, or close friends) in the military? I seriously doubt it.
If you are not willing to enlist yourself or your children, please STFU.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - Carnos Jax - 10-16-2011
Dakota wrote: Listen to a Ghandi disciple trying to sound like Rambo. It ain't working, tandori.
It's working on you, because every time I hit you close to heart, all you can come back with are ethnic slurs. (^_^)
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - Mac1337 - 10-17-2011
I love tandori. What slur? Take a little pride in home cooking.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - john dough - 10-17-2011
When getting stomped, this is what the troll resorts to.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - Mac1337 - 10-17-2011
It is all in your little mind, doughboy.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - OWC Jamie - 10-17-2011
rjmacs wrote:
[quote=Dakota]
Come on, admit it. This was just bound to happen. We have to nab Joe Kony, yeah that Joe, before it is too late. Looks like Libya is winding down anyway.
Well, i'd really start to worry when we start sending disarmed troops anywhere in the world!
Like, to the Mexican Border ?
http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/052510_nationalguard/1200-national-guard-troops-deployed-border/
"The fulfillment of my request is a clear sign that this administration is beginning to take border security seriously,"said Giffords.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/26/border-troops-wont-do-much-say-residents/?test=latestnews
“There’s guys out here with no guns and they’re our troops. The Mexicans think we’re nuts”
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - Mac1337 - 10-17-2011
Police in some countries are unarmed. So they are not police anymore?
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - rjmacs - 10-17-2011
billb wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]
[quote=Dakota]
Come on, admit it. This was just bound to happen. We have to nab Joe Kony, yeah that Joe, before it is too late. Looks like Libya is winding down anyway.
Well, i'd really start to worry when we start sending disarmed troops anywhere in the world!
Like, to the Mexican Border ?
http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/052510_nationalguard/1200-national-guard-troops-deployed-border/
"The fulfillment of my request is a clear sign that this administration is beginning to take border security seriously,"said Giffords.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/26/border-troops-wont-do-much-say-residents/?test=latestnews
“There’s guys out here with no guns and they’re our troops. The Mexicans think we’re nuts”
I read those articles, and other than an unsubstantiated quote from an angry citizen, i didn't see any evidence that troops deployed along the border are unarmed. Do you have a better source for that claim? I don't find Joe Border a credible authority. This report details the small arms carried by members of Operation Jump Start on the border. Is it wrong?
Dakota wrote:
Police in some countries are unarmed. So they are not police anymore?
Police are not troops. Are you changing the conversation to something new? We don't deploy unarmed troops. I just was confused by your using the term. 'Combat' and 'noncombat' is NOT the same as 'armed' and 'unarmed.' Even a cursory knowledge of the U.S. military would yield this insight.
As for your comments on liberals and military action: it bothers me that you see no room for liberals who oppose some military interventions, and favor others. Or, that you associate endorsement or opposition to military missions solely to party affiliation, not thoughtful reflection. There are lots of liberals who supported military action in Afghanistan, but not Iraq. There are those who support the action in Africa, but not Afghanistan or Iraq. It's frustrating that you do the same thing that anti-conservatives sometimes do: you overgeneralize and paint with a broad brush. It's not fair when others do it to you, and it's not helpful when you do it.
But we can still talk about it, and not call each other names. I'm cool with that.
Re: You all knew this was coming: armed troops to Central Africa - OWC Jamie - 10-17-2011
rjmacs wrote:
[quote=billb]
[quote=rjmacs]
[quote=Dakota]
Come on, admit it. This was just bound to happen. We have to nab Joe Kony, yeah that Joe, before it is too late. Looks like Libya is winding down anyway.
Well, i'd really start to worry when we start sending disarmed troops anywhere in the world!
Like, to the Mexican Border ?
http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/052510_nationalguard/1200-national-guard-troops-deployed-border/
"The fulfillment of my request is a clear sign that this administration is beginning to take border security seriously,"said Giffords.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/26/border-troops-wont-do-much-say-residents/?test=latestnews
“There’s guys out here with no guns and they’re our troops. The Mexicans think we’re nuts”
I read those articles, and other than an unsubstantiated quote from an angry citizen, i didn't see any evidence that troops deployed along the border are unarmed. Do you have a better source for that claim? I don't find Joe Border a credible authority. This report details the small arms carried by members of Operation Jump Start on the border. Is it wrong?
Dakota wrote:
Police in some countries are unarmed. So they are not police anymore?
Police are not troops. Are you changing the conversation to something new? We don't deploy unarmed troops. I just was confused by your using the term. 'Combat' and 'noncombat' is NOT the same as 'armed' and 'unarmed.' Even a cursory knowledge of the U.S. military would yield this insight.
As for your comments on liberals and military action: it bothers me that you see no room for liberals who oppose some military interventions, and favor others. Or, that you associate endorsement or opposition to military missions solely to party affiliation, not thoughtful reflection. There are lots of liberals who supported military action in Afghanistan, but not Iraq. There are those who support the action in Africa, but not Afghanistan or Iraq. It's frustrating that you do the same thing that anti-conservatives sometimes do: you overgeneralize and paint with a broad brush. It's not fair when others do it to you, and it's not helpful when you do it.
But we can still talk about it, and not call each other names. I'm cool with that.
It's probably terribly inconvenient, but you could resource beyond where that article conveniently leaves off:
In May 2010 President Barack Obama began a new chapter in the border mission calling once again on National guard (army and Air) troops. This time only calling those troops in the border states for the mission. As of this time, there has been no mention of what the new border mission will be called.